Why do you reject egalitarian beliefs?

peaceful-forest said:

For those of you that identify as conservative or complementarian, if you have heard egalitarian beliefs and rejected them, why? How are egalitarian beliefs wrong?

Note - I'm only asking the why, to hear your side. I do not wish to start an argument on this thread. Thank you.

Click to expand...

Being equal is an illusion, someone needs to lead, decisions are made. The idea of being equal is just used to manipulate.

Equality is a mathematical abstraction. Not even identical twins are "equal".

There are natural differences between men and women. Family roles lend themselves to those differences. To try to make things equal is to try to live an unnatural life.

peaceful-forest said:

if you have heard egalitarian beliefs and rejected them, why?

Click to expand...

Because egalitarianism requires one to ignore significant parts of the Bible, especially the New Testament, and because it stands in contradiction to the example set by our Lord as well as the consistent teaching of the Church for its entire history.

peaceful-forest said:

How are egalitarian beliefs wrong?

Click to expand...

The ordination of women was never a Christian practice. Christ Himself chose twelve men to lead the Church; He did have disciples who were women, but these didn't hold the office of bishop. Moreover, Christian ordination, both as recorded in the epistles of St. Paul and in Church history, was applied only to men. As Christians believe the faith was "once for all delivered to the saints," I do not see a way for one to argue for a change in doctrine on ordination or any other topic from a place of Christian piety.

Similarly, we see both biblically and in the writings of the Church Fathers (themselves often citing Scripture) that men and women have different roles. Women are instructed to cover their hair, men are instructed not to cover theirs. Wives are told to submit to their husbands, husbands are told to love their wives with the same self-sacrificial love with which our Lord loves His Church. "The man is the head of the woman," and so on. Egalitarians argue that these passages aren't applicable today and that they're reflective of the culture of the time, but this to me seems like another thinly veiled way of weaselling out of doctrine offensive to feminist sensibilities.

That reminds me, the bible does teach that being effeminate is sinful for males. This is a separate from the sin of having sex with other men.

The egalitarian doctrine reminds me of the Queen of Heaven worship discussion in Jeremiah 44.

Being lukewarm and replacing the Holy Spirit with emotional satisfaction, results in a church with no spiritual power. There are other things that accomplish this same result, but in this thread we are talking about why egalitarianism is rejected.

America generally has strived to create equal opportunity but not equal outcomes. That is because individual motivations and gifts are not equal. Still there are some structural, lasting issues that should be addressed more. For instance, some public schools are far better than others. The poor too rarely have access to private schools and often face more difficult issues at home, from greater substance abuse issues, crime, single parent families, nutrition and poverty itself. Still, there is some transfers that the government initiates.

Biblically in Acts, among Christians there was some sharing as each had needs or surplus. This was a voluntary religious system though and not forced or coming from government. God never set in motion economic equality that I know of. He who gives sparingly reaps sparingly, he who gives much, receives much. So it is left up the individual. Proverbs too talks of the sluggard.
Proverbs 24:33-34 (NASB)
33 "A little sleep, a little slumber, A little folding of the hands to rest,"
34 Then your poverty will come as a robber And your want like an armed man.

The one area that the bible excels in is our position in Christ.
Gal 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

So positionally, we are one in Christ, but temporally we still have hierarchies.
In general, many fail to see that he who is least among us, is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. So God is fully just in the end. The bible talks too of greater judgments on some in hell, and greater rewards for those who excel as Christians in heaven.

Since no system on earth has ever produced egalitarianism, certainly some systems are better than others. The elite though always have exceptional privilege and since man is sinful in nature, that will always be. "The poor you will always have with you." So whether economically, socially, or even politically equality can be a goal, the idea of equal opportunity seems far more superior than equal outcomes.

Richard T said:

America generally has strived to create equal opportunity but not equal outcomes. That is because individual motivations and gifts are not equal. Still there are some structural, lasting issues that should be addressed more. For instance, some public schools are far better than others. The poor too rarely have access to private schools and often face more difficult issues at home, from greater substance abuse issues, crime, single parent families, nutrition and poverty itself. Still, there is some transfers that the government initiates.

Biblically in Acts, among Christians there was some sharing as each had needs or surplus. This was a voluntary religious system though and not forced or coming from government. God never set in motion economic equality that I know of. He who gives sparingly reaps sparingly, he who gives much, receives much. So it is left up the individual. Proverbs too talks of the sluggard.
Proverbs 24:33-34 (NASB)
33 "A little sleep, a little slumber, A little folding of the hands to rest,"
34 Then your poverty will come as a robber And your want like an armed man.

The one area that the bible excels in is our position in Christ.
Gal 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

Click to expand...

So positionally, we are one in Christ, but temporally we still have hierarchies.
In general, many fail to see that he who is least among us, is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. So God is fully just in the end. The bible talks too of greater judgments on some in hell, and greater rewards in heaven for those who excel as Christians.

Click to expand...

Heaven is not egalitarian.

Richard T said:

Since no system on earth has ever produced egalitarianism, certainly some systems are better than others. The elite though always have exceptional privilege and since man is sinful in nature, that will always be. "The poor you will always have with you." So whether economically, socially, or even politically equality can be a goal, the idea of equal opportunity seems far more superior than equal outcomes.

Click to expand...

I would have considered myself egalitarian a few years ago when I first started learning about these issues, however, my views have shifted to being what I believe is complementarian. I believe that both men and women are equal in value. Men are not superior to women, nor are women superior to men, they both need each other.
We are different, our biology confirms that. Women are naturals at certain things that men would struggle to do and vice versa. Women give birth, men do not. Men are typically physically stronger and build muscle more easily than women do. The way we see things, act, think, etc are different from each other. Instead of seeing this as a competition or that I am somehow less than a man, I view it more like we were created to need one another. My strengths may be a man's weaknesses, but I may be weak where he is strong.

I'm no expert theologian, this is just my humble opinion.

Elizabeth35 said:

I would have considered myself egalitarian a few years ago when I first started learning about these issues, however, my views have shifted to being what I believe is complementarian. I believe that both men and women are equal in value. Men are not superior to women, nor are women superior to men, they both need each other.
We are different, our biology confirms that. Women are naturals at certain things that men would struggle to do and vice versa. Women give birth, men do not. Men are typically physically stronger and build muscle more easily than women do. The way we see things, act, think, etc are different from each other. Instead of seeing this as a competition or that I am somehow less than a man, I view it more like we were created to need one another. My strengths may be a man's weaknesses, but I may be weak where he is strong.

I'm no expert theologian, this is just my humble opinion.

Click to expand...

One is not "better" than the other.

They were created for different roles, where likewise, one role is not better than the other, for it takes both, neither can do without the other.

Clare73 said:

Heaven is not egalitarian.

Click to expand...

Yes, you are right. The biggest chasm though is the gulf between heaven and hell. I am glad to have to think about when I look at those who are lost and what I can do about it.

Clare73 said:

They were created for different roles, where likewise, one role is not better than the other, for it takes both, neither can do without the other.

Click to expand...

That was applicable for a time in the "Garden of Eden", but what about the fallen nature of sinful mankind (both males and females)? Was it wrong of GOD to let the northern tribes be taken captive to the strange lands of idol worshipers?

What bout a fallen woman (e.g. Mary Magdalene) who becomes a new creation in Christ; whereas a minister of the gospel may be guilty of adultery (Matthew 5:28) as well as being a thief and liar?

Seems like the following definition of egalitarianism has a blind eye to sin and evil impulses such as murder, rape, theft, false witness, etc, etc. What about an abortion doctor whose primary motivation is the monetary benefit or a dishonest dictator (is there any other kind)?

Didn't you mean that all those in Heaven are eqalitarians from HIS perspective?


is it possible that most egalitarians are secular humanists that would seemingly contend that the Holy Bible is just so much "religion". Manmade religion that does more to prevent equal treatment than encourage equal treatment. Are the vast majority of "egalitiarians" secular humanists.

AbbaLove said:

That was applicable for a time in the "Garden of Eden", but what about the fallen nature of sinful mankind (both males and females)? Was it wrong of GOD to let the northern tribes be taken captive to the strange lands of idol worshipers?

Click to expand...

God is not egalitarian.

AbbaLove said:

What bout a fallen woman (e.g. Mary Magdalene) who becomes a new creation in Christ; whereas a minister of the gospel may be guilty of adultery (Matthew 5:28) as well as being a thief and liar?

Seems like the following definition of egalitarianism has a blind eye to sin and evil impulses such as murder, rape, theft, false witness, etc, etc. What about an abortion doctor whose primary motivation is the monetary benefit or a dishonest dictator (is there any other kind)?

Didn't you mean that all those in Heaven are eqalitarians from HIS perspective?

Egalitarianism, in simple terms, is the belief that everyone should have equal rights, opportunities, and treatment, regardless of factors like race, gender, or social class. (what about sin or do both earthly and heavenly egalitarians dismiss sin/evil?)​

​

is it possible that most egalitarians are secular humanists that would seemingly contend that the Holy Bible is just so much "religion". Manmade religion that does more to prevent equal treatment than encourage equal treatment. Are the vast majority of "egalitiarians" secular humanists.

Click to expand...

peaceful-forest said:

Have you read or studied the New Testament in the original Greek language that it was written in?

Click to expand...

Yes, and I would recommend everyone do so. I'll add that I don't consider reading an interlinear version or just going to Bible Hub and clicking "Greek" to see Strong's top definition for each word to be studying; these are legitimate ways to have access to the Greek text and to get some help if struggling on a translation, but if your entire knowledge of Greek comes from these sources, you haven't studied Greek.