Baptist views on feminism

[edie19]

if I may interject some humor into the thread

my 7 year old grandson and I were driving together about 2 weeks ago. Out of the blue he asked me what happened to our green house (we moved out of that house when he was just over 2 years old). I told him we sold it when we moved into our new house.

Lukas then asked me why we moved. I explained that first of all our family was bigger - we had his mommy and him now. I also pointed out that were some things our old house didn't have that we wanted - a first floor laundry, first floor master, extra bathrooms.

Next question from Lukas was how did we find our house. I explained that we looked at several houses, some we didn't like, some his Bumpa (grandpa) liked, others I liked. Then I told him that I knew which house his Bumpa liked best so I compromised on a couple of things and we bought the house we have now.

He thought for a tad then asked me, "So you talked about it?" I answered yes. Then he asked, "And you had to agree?" Again I answered yes. Final question, "So you didn't get to have your own way?" This time my answer was "no, you don't get your own way all the time."






He thought a bit longer and then stated quite clearly, "I don't think I'm going to get married."

 

[JCFantasy23]

I see nothing wrong with the biblical viewpoint on marriage, and think many women take it the wrong way and therefore are threatened by it. As for the initial feminist movement, it wasn't always a bad thing. Women weren't treated fairly in the old days as the balance had been unsettled, mainly due to men who took advantage. It's a good thing women are now able to be get an education as thorough as men, have obtained more rights and freedoms, are not seen as property to be traded and without rights, and can do more than sit by the fire and crochet while the men are outside doing what they wish. I think it blew up bit by bit, though, and then the balance was unsettled again.

 

[HitmanR2]

Hello all,
Men and women are not created equal. Woman was created as a helper for the man, as God saw that it was not good for man to be alone. I understand this, and try to remember that my wife is a part of me. To bring harm to her is to destroy myself.
While she should be submissive and respectful toward me, I am to protect and cherish her, and love her with the same sacrificial love that Jesus has for His church. If I do that, I will not seek to put too much on her, but rather look to ease her burden as she is the weaker vessel.
The relationship between a husband and wife is a wonderful thing, each have very different, but no less important roles within the family structure, A good understanding of those roles helps tremendously.

My views may be seen as sexist...and I may be, but I do appreciate women, my mother was one!


___________________________

 

[Ringo84]

I believe in equal relationships with mutual submission. There will be no hierarchy in my marriage. My wife and I will be equal partners who mutually respect and submit to each other.

I don't believe that women are nothing more than a "helper" or a "weaker vessel" and I reject that viewpoint for my future marriage.
Ringo

 

[leothelioness]

Men and women are not created equal.

Do you mean "equal" in terms of human worth or in terms of our roles as set out by God?

God created us as equals in terms of our worth and usefullness as humans, but our roles, while not equal, are of equal importance. Without one or the other the family unit ceases to work.

 

[leothelioness]

I believe in equal relationships with mutual submission. There will be no hierarchy in my marriage. My wife and I will be equal partners who mutually respect and submit to each other.

I don't believe that women are nothing more than a "helper" or a "weaker vessel" and I reject that viewpoint for my future marriage.
Ringo

I agree.

Will you marry me?

 

[dies-l]

I believe in equal relationships with mutual submission. There will be no hierarchy in my marriage. My wife and I will be equal partners who mutually respect and submit to each other.

I think that this is the biblical standard that this thread has been hinting at. Look at Ephesians 5:

21 Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. (a general admonition to all in the body of Christ, male and female, Jew and Gentile, slave and free, provides the context for 22-33).

22 Wives, be subject to your husbands as you are to the Lord. (application of verse 21 to the role of the wife in the marital relationship).

23 For the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church, the body of which he is the Savior. 24 Just as the church is subject to Christ, so also wives ought to be, in everything, to their husbands. (extension of verse 22, in light of the way the household was ordered in the time and place in which Paul was writing)

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 in order to make her holy by cleansing her with the washing of water by the word, 27 so as to present the church to himself in splendor, without a spot or wrinkle or anything of the kind—yes, so that she may be holy and without blemish. 28 In the same way, husbands should love their wives as they do their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hates his own body, but he nourishes and tenderly cares for it, just as Christ does for the church, 30 because we are members of his body. F25 31 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." 32 This is a great mystery, and I am applying it to Christ and the church. 33 Each of you, however, should love his wife as himself, and a wife should respect her husband. (application of verse 21 to husbands in relation to their wives, explaining that, with the respect given to leaders comes great responsibilty).

In short, Paul says (a) submit to one another mutually, (b) wives accept the authority your husband has by virtue of his love for you (c) and husbands surrender your own needs to those of your wife, according to Christ's model of self-sacrifice, so that her respect for you is not misplaced.

 

[MrJG]

I heard a preacher say one time that a man and a woman in a marriage are like two Master Sergeants preparing to make an amphibious assault on an island (this preacher was a former marine ). He said that while both are master sergeants, the Admiral will only put one in command. God has given that role to the man (Eph. 5:21-25; "Submitting" in verse 21 is referenced to Philippians 2:3). He has made the man to be the head of the house as Christ is the head of the church. The woman is to submit to the authority of the man just as we as Christians submit to the authority of Christ. Genesis 3:16 and Ephesians 5:24 make this very clear. The husband and wife should love and respect each other equally and should share responsibility. I am not saying that the woman should sit around all day and sew or that she shouldn't work, but I am saying that God has placed man as the ruler of the household. Man should not abuse this power, and decisions should be made together. If decisions are not made together and the man always does what he wants instead of considering the woman's thoughts then that is a recipe for disaster. Same goes for women. However, if after discussing a matter, the two can not agree, the wife must submit to the decisoin of the husband.

 

[Ringo84]

I think that this is the biblical standard that this thread has been hinting at. Look at Ephesians 5:

21 Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. (a general admonition to all in the body of Christ, male and female, Jew and Gentile, slave and free, provides the context for 22-33).

22 Wives, be subject to your husbands as you are to the Lord. (application of verse 21 to the role of the wife in the marital relationship).

23 For the husband is the head of the wife just as Christ is the head of the church, the body of which he is the Savior. 24 Just as the church is subject to Christ, so also wives ought to be, in everything, to their husbands. (extension of verse 22, in light of the way the household was ordered in the time and place in which Paul was writing)

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, 26 in order to make her holy by cleansing her with the washing of water by the word, 27 so as to present the church to himself in splendor, without a spot or wrinkle or anything of the kind—yes, so that she may be holy and without blemish. 28 In the same way, husbands should love their wives as they do their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 For no one ever hates his own body, but he nourishes and tenderly cares for it, just as Christ does for the church, 30 because we are members of his body. F25 31 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh." 32 This is a great mystery, and I am applying it to Christ and the church. 33 Each of you, however, should love his wife as himself, and a wife should respect her husband. (application of verse 21 to husbands in relation to their wives, explaining that, with the respect given to leaders comes great responsibilty).

In short, Paul says (a) submit to one another mutually, (b) wives accept the authority your husband has by virtue of his love for you (c) and husbands surrender your own needs to those of your wife, according to Christ's model of self-sacrifice, so that her respect for you is not misplaced.

Agreed. I don't understand how it is that women can be equal to men while at the same time having to be the ones that submit. It doesn't quite make sense.
Ringo

 

[Ringo84]

I agree.

Will you marry me?

Sure
Ringo

 

[NDNgirl4ever]

However, if after discussing a matter, the two can not agree, the wife must submit to the decisoin of the husband.

But what if the husband's decision is completely wrong?

I believe in equal relationships with mutual submission. There will be no hierarchy in my marriage. My wife and I will be equal partners who mutually respect and submit to each other.

I don't believe that women are nothing more than a "helper" or a "weaker vessel" and I reject that viewpoint for my future marriage.

I agree 100%. That's the type of marriage that my parents have, and they have been married for 24 years.

I was raised United Methodist, and then in a conservative Southren Baptist church. I am a feminist. I believe that men and women are equal partners, and that women should have the same opprotunities as men. I am an EMT-Basic. The profession of EMS is still a mostly male profession, but I love it. Only a couple of decades ago, you didn't see female EMTs or Paramedics anywhere. When I was in training(just oer 2 years ago), not only was I one of several females, two of my instructors(both fire fighter/paramedics) were women. I am happy that those 'radical feminists' in the 70's challenged the status quo and open the door for me. My ultimate goal is to become a nurse and get my Master's degree in Midwifery. The profession of nurse-midwifery owes a lot to those 'radical feminists' in the 70s as well. For the longest time, birth was controlled by male doctors who treated pregnancy and birth as some sort of life threating illness. However, in the 70s, women started taking birth back, and slowly but surely the way we view birth is changing. The rate of homebirth and midwifery is on the rise, and birth is being viewed as a normal, natural process(which it usually is) instead of a medical emergency(which is very rare).

I agree that it's great to be a wife and mother. I want to get married and be a mother one day, but I would not be happy as a stay at home mom. I plan to continue working full time a nurse and midwife after I have kids. I am grateful that feminists before me helped give me the option to do that. If a woman wants to be a stay at home mom, that's great and I support her 100%. However, women should not be obligated to give up their careers if they don't want to.

So in short, I am a Baptist who has no trouble with feminism.

 

[TimRout]

I'm just curious what my fellow Baptists think about feminism. I'm not talking about the radical feminism of the 60's and 70's, but traditional feminism.

I was raised very conservative Southern Baptist, but I've realised as of late that I'm a bit of a feminist. A lot of the old time Baptists believe that the woman's place is in the home and actually encourage women to stay barefoot and pregnant. I do not agree with this. I also do not take to well to the idea of "submitting" to my husband. I think we should be equal and show equal respect to each other.

Those are a couple of things right off that I can think of, but I just wanted to get everyone else's opinions on this as well. Feel free to include Scripture if you like.

The question every Christian must confront is not "How do I feel about feminism?" Rather, the only relevant issue is, "What does God's Word say?" You claim to be a Christian (or so I gather) yet you reject the Bible's teaching on headship and submission in marriage. Why? On what basis? By whose authority? What extracanonical hermeneutic are you applying to the text of Scripture, so as to make feminism seem something less than the offensive stench it truly is? Feminism, even in its mildest forms, constitutes nothing less than philosophical rebellion against the rule of God.

 

[TimRout]

Maybe a better question to ask is what is the Biblical definition of submission? What does that entail?

"In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior. Your adornment must not be merely external--braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands;
just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear." [1 Peter 3:1-6/NASB]


I suspect this addresses your question. To submit to your husband means to acknowledge his authority over you and honor him as the church honors Christ. Be like Sarah, who obeyed her husband and called him master (literally "lord").

 

[DeaconDean]

Feminism in the SBC has become a hot issue in recent years. More so since Conservatives have regained control of the SBC.

Let me explain, Liberals and Modernists believe that the Bible should not be taken literally anymore. Since the world has changed, the Bible needs to viewed in relation to the current world.

Thus, those passages which speak of women submitting to the husband, learning in silence, and etc., do not apply today.

Two things I know, in Malachi, we read:

"For I am the LORD, I change not;" -Mal. 3:6 (KJV)

We know that the Bible is God's reveaded word:

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God," -2 Tim. 3:16 (KJV)

Now add 1+1 and that equals, God does not change, scripture is God's word, therefore scripture does not change neither.

The scriptures also state that there is varibleness in God. (Jas. 1:17)

Those scriptures mean as much today and are as relavent as they were nearly 2000 years ago.

Now, that is my stance. And I will not compromise God's word for nobody.

Now, here is how I stand on that issue.

My wife and I will celebrate our 23rd anniversary on July 3rd. in 2000, I was ordained as a Deacon in my church. I do not "lord" over my wife. In todays society, it takes two to pay bills, and raise children. When my son was born, my wife agreed that it was best for her to stay at home until he was able to start school. And we did just that. Until recently, she was working, helping me to pay bills, buy groceries, etc. We entered this marriage on equal grounds. She does not exercise authority over me, and I do not exercise authority over her. I do not walk in front with her a couple of steps behind. We walk this life hand-in-hand, shoulder to shoulder. She does not walk with her head down, instead she walks with her head and proudly. I do not "lord" over her, and I do not treat her as my "servant". The only real disagreements we have any more is on where to go eat.

In church matters, I will ask for her opinion regarding some things. On some matters, I do not discuss what is mentioned in deacon's meetings.

Now I do truthfully consider her opinions, and weigh them as I do my own. If they are sound, I might change my mind on something. But ultimately, the decision is mine, according to scripture.

After all, even Abraham was directed by God to do as Sarah told him to do. (cf. Gen. 21:12)

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[dies-l]

Feminism in the SBC has become a hot issue in recent years. More so since Conservatives have regained control of the SBC.

Let me explain, Liberals and Modernists believe that the Bible should not be taken literally anymore. Since the world has changed, the Bible needs to viewed in relation to the current world.

Thus, those passages which speak of women submitting to the husband, learning in silence, and etc., do not apply today.

Two things I know, in Malachi, we read:

"For I am the LORD, I change not;" -Mal. 3:6 (KJV)

We know that the Bible is God's reveaded word:

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God," -2 Tim. 3:16 (KJV)

Now add 1+1 and that equals, God does not change, scripture is God's word, therefore scripture does not change neither.

The scriptures also state that there is varibleness in God. (Jas. 1:17)

Those scriptures mean as much today and are as relavent as they were nearly 2000 years ago.

Now, that is my stance. And I will not compromise God's word for nobody.

I agree with you to an extent. There is an unfortunate trend, in some circles, to disregard, without good reason, some portions of Scripture.

OTOH, we need always be mindful that context is an important part of the message being conveyed. As a recent example, last night I had my head shaved by kids in our youth group as a reward for the money they raised to fight starvation. One of the students told me on the bus ride home (I am also the bus driver) that she "loved my hair today." If not for the context of the "head shaving ceremony", this would have been taken as a perfectly legitimate compliment. However, the context indicated that her meaning was otherwise.

In the same way, I believe that it is important for us to seek to understand the socio-historical context of the Scripture we read. Sometimes, this has little impact on the meaning. Other times, the impact is huge. For example, there are passages in the New Testament that imply male headship as being implied by nature. It would be difficult to argue that Paul was referring only to his own cultural context. However, there are other passages, such as 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and Ephesians 5:22-24 that seem to more strongly reflect a cultural context.

Now, here is how I stand on that issue.

My wife and I will celebrate our 23rd anniversary on July 3rd. in 2000, I was ordained as a Deacon in my church. I do not "lord" over my wife. In todays society, it takes two to pay bills, and raise children. When my son was born, my wife agreed that it was best for her to stay at home until he was able to start school. And we did just that. Until recently, she was working, helping me to pay bills, buy groceries, etc. We entered this marriage on equal grounds. She does not exercise authority over me, and I do not exercise authority over her. I do not walk in front with her a couple of steps behind. We walk this life hand-in-hand, shoulder to shoulder. She does not walk with her head down, instead she walks with her head and proudly. I do not "lord" over her, and I do not treat her as my "servant". The only real disagreements we have any more is on where to go eat.

This sounds like a very healthy and biblical marriage. Thanks for sharing your example.

In church matters, I will ask for her opinion regarding some things. On some matters, I do not discuss what is mentioned in deacon's meetings.

My wife is on staff at our church, and like you, she does not share with me everything that is discussed at staff and leadership meetings. She will usually only share with me if either (a) it is not confidential or (b) it is something that directly pertains to my ministry. Often, she will even keep private the latter so that our pastor can disseminate information as he sees fit.

Now I do truthfully consider her opinions, and weigh them as I do my own. If they are sound, I might change my mind on something. But ultimately, the decision is mine, according to scripture.

My marriage works in a similar way. I find, though, that Eph. 5:25-33 reminds me that she is my ultimate concern and that if I do disagree with her that her legitimate best interests had better be my motivation. If I disagree with her because there is something that I want that is different from what she wants, I need to prayerfully consider both her opinion and my own motivation.

As a case in point, when I graduated from law school, I went almost a year before I was able to make any income. Even then (and still now), the only income I make is from my client base (which is hard to build when you have no experience) and an occassional contract position. Early in my career, I wanted to move from Michigan to the Georgia, where attorney work is more widely available. She resisted, because she is convinced that God has called her into the ministry that she is in here in Michigan. Even though we both knew that it was my decision to make and that she would follow if I chose to go to GA, I am glad that we stayed in Michigan. We have both learned so much and I have witnessed miracles in our home congregation and in our finances. We would have missed these had I done what I wanted to do without considering what was best for my wife (even though this arguably has hindered my career to some extent.).

After all, even Abraham was directed by God to do as Sarah told him to do. (cf. Gen. 21:12)

God Bless

Till all are one.

Thanks for your comments. Grace and Peace in Christ.

 

[Ringo84]

Feminism, even in its mildest forms, constitutes nothing less than philosophical rebellion against the rule of God.

Why?

"In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior. Your adornment must not be merely external--braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands;
just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear." [1 Peter 3:1-6/NASB]


I suspect this addresses your question. To submit to your husband means to acknowledge his authority over you and honor him as the church honors Christ. Be like Sarah, who obeyed her husband and called him master (literally "lord").

Why are women the ones supposedly asked to do all of the submitting? Why can there not be mutual submission in a marriage?
Ringo

 

[dies-l]

The question every Christian must confront is not "How do I feel about feminism?" Rather, the only relevant issue is, "What does God's Word say?" You claim to be a Christian (or so I gather) yet you reject the Bible's teaching on headship and submission in marriage. Why? On what basis? By whose authority? What extracanonical hermeneutic are you applying to the text of Scripture, so as to make feminism seem something less than the offensive stench it truly is? Feminism, even in its mildest forms, constitutes nothing less than philosophical rebellion against the rule of God.

When we read the various passages concerning the submission of women to their husbands in light of Eph. 5:21-33 (quoted earlier in the thread), it is not unreasonable to conclude that Paul was advocating some sense of gender equality in the cultural context in which he lived. This conclusion is made even more reasonable in light of Galatians 3:

25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer subject to a disciplinarian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. 27 As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise.

This is not about applying some "extracanonical hermeneutic" to justify feminism. Rather, it is about using Scripture to interpret Scripture and finding that Paul's writings, when understood in their entirety and context, are not nearly as anti-gender-equality as many liberals and conservatives would like to pretend.

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

Feminism has NO place in the Body of Christ...period.
God laid out the instructions plain and clear for all to read.
It is a secular thing and is moot IMHO.



thanks for listening.

 

[MrJG]

But what if the husband's decision is completely wrong?

Hence the discussion between the husband and wife. The Bible says that the man is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church. If Christ has commanded the church to go out and preach to all nations, do you think the church should say "Well hold on a second Jesus, I don't like that, maybe we should do something else." No. I am not comparing the husband to Christ, the Bible is comparing the authority of the husband over the wife to the authority of Christ over the church. I am all for relationships in which there is open communication and discussion and concession, but when the head of the household makes a decision, it should be honored. It is the duty of the wife to submit to her husbands authority and it is the duty of the husband to love and honor his wife.

Thinking Out Loud Here: (Not directed to anyone)
Whether we believe that the wife should or should not submit to the authority of the husband does not matter. What does matter is what the Bible says. If you reject one part of the Bible because it does not fit your philosophy, then why bother to go to church and why bother to call yourself a Christian because our beliefs are based solely on the Bible.

"Let God be true, but every man a liar." Romans 3:4

I never did like that saying "God said it, I believe it, that settles it." Our belief (or disbelief) in what God has said doesn't make what God has said valid or invalid. The saying should be "God said it, that settles it."

 

[Ringo84]

Feminism has NO place in the Body of Christ...period.

Why?
Ringo