• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Complementarians who used to be egalitarian, and egalitarians who used to be complementarian, what made you go in this direction?

TheRisingSun

Active Member
Jun 2, 2024
67
22
27
Cleveland
✟33,927.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
For me personally, I was always staunchly egalitarian. Meaning that I do not believe that traditional gender roles (men being the leader of the household and the church in particular) are a mandate for a Christian life. Complementarians are those who do believe in traditional gender roles.


So I want to ask, for those of you who were on one side, but are now on the other? What changed your mind? What are your stories?

And regardless on whether you changed sides or not, what convictions do you have on each side? What convictions do you have about complementarianism? What convictions do you have on egalitarianism? I'd like to know.
 

com7fy8

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2013
14,598
6,581
Massachusetts
✟638,383.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
If a man were to have a superior position, this does not make him and his wife unequal. The positions can be unequal, but their love makes them equal.

And love makes it good, however either one has higher intelligence or position of leadership.

So, if his being leader is working in love, no one is inferior or a puppet, among other things, because God is the One doing the leading of both of them > what the man leads her to do matches with how God is satisfying and guiding and encouraging her.

And therefore he is wise to make sure they are in agreement, and never is forcing or guilt-tripping her to do anything. Or else, she would not be serving the LORD with gladness and cheerfully.

So, where God's word says the man is the head of his wife, God means this the way He has this work in His love making them one in willing and enjoyment.

"nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock " (1 Peter 5:3)

A leader, God's way, takes the lead in all which is required of all of us, and feeds this to us. And she helps him to do this, feeding to him her good example, the way he does with her.

So, when there is disagreement, I offer that we do well to first pray until God has us in agreement with Him, then enjoy discovering how He has us doing better than what either of us wanted while conflicting with each other. Because God is more creative than either of us, and better than we are.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

PloverWing

Episcopalian
May 5, 2012
5,043
6,023
New Jersey
✟387,963.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
So I want to ask, for those of you who were on one side, but are now on the other? What changed your mind? What are your stories?

I was raised in a church and a Christian K-12 school that held the patriarchal view. (The euphemism "complementarian" hadn't been coined yet, but I'm willing to use it for the purposes of this discussion.) I am now egalitarian. Many things worked together to change my mind, over the course of 10-20 years.

1. Over time, I changed the way I read and apply the Bible. When I read the New Testament epistles (where the standard "clobber verses" are found), I'm not reading a message written directly to me, sitting in my back yard in New Jersey in June 2024. I'm reading someone else's mail. I'm reading the advice that St Paul and others wrote to particular first-century churches facing particular situations. My church's situation may be like that earlier situation, or it might not. We have to think about what's similar and what's different, as we seek to apply the early church's wisdom to our present lives.

2. Simply living the life of an adult woman for a couple of decades gave me important information. Various reasons are sometimes given for why it's good for men to be in leadership and bad for women to be in leadership. Women shouldn't be in leadership, I was told, because {women aren't logical thinkers; women have emotions; women aren't well-educated; women don't understand theology as well as men; women are easily deceived, and men aren't}. (Did I miss any?) After I got away from my youth group leaders and lived some years of actual life, I found that all the reasons provided to me were either overgeneralizations, plainly false, or irrelevant. So that leaves us with: The reason to suppress women's leadership is because St Paul imposed it as a Law on the church, and we obey the Law simply because it's the Law, even if it doesn't make sense and even if it harms people.

3. Except: St Paul goes out of his way to argue, in Galatians and Romans and elsewhere, that as Christians we're freed from the Law. He does not seem to be saying that we replace Moses' Law with Paul's Law. So we're misusing St Paul's letters if we look at them as a new Law.

4. Finally, the Bible isn't just "clobber verses". There are positive teachings for women in the Bible as well. The standard one to cite is "there is no longer male and female, for all of you are one in Christ Jesus." I'll add that later in Galatians, St Paul writes "For freedom Christ has set us free. Stand firm, therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery." And that brings me to a last observation, that in many places throughout the Bible we see God siding not with the oppressors but with the oppressed. The God of the Exodus, of the Prophets, and of the Magnificat sees when women are held down by patriarchy, and cares about their suffering.
 
Upvote 0