Men Should Boycott Gillette Razors

Gillette Razors decided to jump into the MeToo# movement with an ad telling men they need to be their best – a take on their slogan “the best a man can get”.  Now as Christians we also want to encourage men to be their best.  So, what could be wrong with such an ad? I have attached the ad in question to this article for you to watch and now I will break down some of the key scenes from this “short story” from Gillette.

It starts with a scene of a boy running from other boys who want to hurt him, or in other words bullies. Another scene features young boys sitting on a couch watching TV with an old cartoon where men were catcalling a woman and then another scene where a man on a TV show grabbed the maid’s behind.  Then they then show a scene where a male business man interrupts a female business woman and explains what she was saying and it zooms in on her face to show her feelings were hurt by this action.

In another scene they show a traditional neighborhood backyard barbeque where two boys are fighting in the grass as the fathers look on smiling.

It is here where we see a row of men in front of Barbeques saying “Boys will boys” and repeating the phrase over and over again.

Then the Gillette ad says they “believe in the best in men” followed by a CSPAN clip of the actor Terry Crew speaking before congress stating that “Men need to hold other men accountable” to which Gillette follows his words with “to say the right thing, to act the right way”.

When using the phrase “say the right thing” they have boys at a pool saying something crass to some girls with other boys stepping in to stop them.  For the phrase “act the right way” they have an attractive woman in a tight outfit walking down a busy city side walk with a man checking her out and he goes to walk toward her to say something and another man stops him and says “not cool, not cool”.

We then see a scene of the boy from the beginning of the ad running from the same bullies as another father sees the situation.  We see a video of a father telling his daughter to repeat the phrase “I am strong, I am strong”.

We then see the father on the street intervene to help the boy who was being chased by bullies followed by the Dad in the infamous neighborhood backyard barbeque intervening in the boys fighting in the grass telling them “That’s not how we treat each other ok”.

What is Wrong with This Ad?

The first problem is that this ad mixes in the bad behavior of some men with behavior by most men that may not actually be wrong.

We as Christian men would absolutely condemn bullying at any age. We should teach our sons not to bully others.  So Christian men would clearly condemn the group of boys chasing the other boy or texting nasty things to another boy.

But what about the two young boys fighting at the neighborhood barbeque.  We don’t know how that fight started.  It may have started with one boy actually bullying the other or punching the other boy and then we only see the end of it with the boy fighting back against the bully.

Contrary to our modern cultural ideas, violence is not always wrong.  If violence is done in self-defense or defense of others than it can be noble and right.

King David even speaks of the fact that God teaches men to fight and make war:

“Blessed be the Lord my strength which teacheth my hands to war, and my fingers to fight

Psalm 144:1 (KJV)

Men are naturally aggressive, competitive, protective and physical.  Having raised 4 boys, two which are now adults and two who are in their mid-teens, I can tell you boys are all these things.  And yes, sometimes my boys have fought.

And while I have intervened at times when I thought it was getting too rough or out of hand, I certainly was not going to intervene at the first sign of physical aggression from one brother to another.

But our modern world teaches us that male physical aggression in any form or shape is always wrong and it must be immediately stopped.  And that was the message that Gillette was trying to get across.  That is why so many today condemn highly physical sports like football, hockey or boxing which encourage male aggression.

Now let’s take on the catcalling scenes.  No Christian man should approve of a man shouting out crude sexual comments to a random woman he does not know walking down the street.  But what about just telling a woman she is beautiful and asking for her phone number? There was a time in our society when most women would have found this flattering, but now it is lumped in as catcalling by many today.

So, let’s take the scene where a man sees a beautiful woman walking down the side walk, checks her out and wants to go talk to her.  We have no idea what he was going to say.  What if he walked up to her and told her she was beautiful and wanted her number to call her to go out some time?  But instead we have the “white knight” man who steps in to save this poor woman from this other man’s brutish behavior.  Now if he had something sexually crude, I would have been all for the “white knight” treatment.

But we simply don’t know what his intentions were.  And the producer of the video is leaving it vague on purpose.  Why? Because the producer of this Gillette ad wants us to condemn this man for going after a woman simply because she was beautiful.  By doing so he is “sexually objectifying her”.  Instead men should only ask women on dates after they get to know them and are interested in their “full person”, fully appreciating their mind and intellect.  Someone please get me a vomit bag.

Men need to stop being physically oriented visual creatures and instead they need to become more like women who are relational and holistic in their attraction mechanisms, that is one message of this ad.

And before we continue, here is a little something to consider for all my detractors out there.  We are taught today that men can only see women as sex objects to be used for their pleasure or as persons.  They must make a conscious choice we are told because it is supposedly impossible for a man to see a woman both as a sex object and as a person.

I chuckle every time I read an article or watch a YouTube video reviewing my site where they say I believe woman were only made for man’s sexual pleasure.  Anyone who has read my blog for some time and is honest about what I have said will admit that I say ONE of the reasons God made woman was for man’s sexual pleasure.  But it certainly was not the only reason.  But it’s easier to demonize my teachings if someone can say I teach that the only reason a woman was made was for man’s sexual pleasure.  The truth is that most of my detractors find it offensive that I teach woman was made for man at all, whether as a helper, mother, homemaker or lover.

If you want to understand how it is actually possible for a man to view a woman as a sex object and as a person, I encourage you to read my article “Why it is NOT Wrong for Men to See Women as Sex Objects”.

Now let’s return to the Gillette commercial.  So what message were we supposed to be getting with that board room scene?

In that scene we see a man explaining what one of the female members at the table has said.  This is a condemnation of what feminists call “mansplaining”.  This is when a man tries to explain something that a woman has said and this ALWAYS wrong according to feminists. Now of course when a woman explains what a man has said this is always right.  Maybe the woman was a new employee and had struggled to explain something correctly.  But the message is, if a woman has an upset look on her face the man must automatically be wrong. But I digress.

So, like most of the liberal progressive propaganda, they mix some behaviors that the vast majority of Christian and non-Christian people would condemn with situations that may or may not be wrong for men or boys depending on the circumstances. Then they say that men approve of all bad behaviors by men by saying “Boys will boys”.  Like if a man grabs some random woman’s breast or bottom, we will all just laugh and say “Boys will be boys”. Or if some group of boys is chasing down another boy to give him a beat down, we will just smile and say “Boys will boys”.  Such an insinuation is insulting to men as gender.

The Liberal bastardization of the phrase “Boys will boys”

“Boys will be boys” has historically been used to talk about normal masculine behavior.  It was NOT used to talk about abnormal masculine behavior.  So, to say that “Boys will boys” applies to things like bullying, catcalling women with crude sexual language, groping women or raping women is to say this has been normal behavior for men.  In other words, they are saying most men have historically done this and most men today are still doing this.

Such an accusation is demonstrably false!  Most men have not and do not walk up to random women and use crude sexual language, grope them or try to rape them.  Even in work place settings or in dating situations the vast majority of men do not do these things.

Have there always been some men like this throughout the history of mankind? Yes. But to say most men have acted in this way or that most men today act in this way is wrong.

The real agenda with intermixing clearly bad behavior with what might be normal masculine behavior and then lumping it all together saying “Boys will boys” is to attack what is truly normal masculine behavior.

The feminists and secular progressives are on a mission today to erase the two genders God created to form their own new “non-gendered” person.  In this effort they encourage women to be more assertive and competitive like men while at the same time telling men they need to be more like women by being less assertive, less aggressive and less competitive.  In the sexual arena again, they encourage women to be more physically oriented like men and they encourage men to be more relationally oriented like women.  Women need to toughen up and men need to get in touch with their feelings, or so we are told.

Again, this all part of an insidious effort to erase the distinctions between the genders that God created. And this is part of a larger cultural cold war that is only now beginning to heat up.  But secular progressives living in their safe little spaces believe with education commercials like this Gillette ad they can literally reprogram men to be what they want them to be.   This is because they embrace the flawed “blank slate” theory that all human behavior is taught and learned from one’s culture and surroundings.  So, you can just educate people and change the culture to change human nature or so the feminists and secular progressives tell us.

But the truth is that while we are influenced by our upbringing and our culture there are some things that are biologically hardwired into our brains as men and women by God.  And the masculine traits of being more aggressive, assertive, competitive, protective, stoic and more physically sexually oriented are in fact hardwired traits in the brains of most men.

Then of course we have the exceptions, the abnormal men who are more feminine and the abnormal women who are more masculine.  How do we explain that from a Christian perspective? For answers to that see my articles “Masculine Women and Feminine Men Part 1” and “Masculine Women and Feminine Men Part 2”.

The Attack on Masculinity is an Attack on God himself

The Bible tells us why God made the distinct masculine and feminine human natures in the following two passages:

“7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.”

I Corinthians 11:7-9 (KJV)

“23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.”

Ephesians 5:23-24 (KJV)

These passages tell us that God made the masculine human nature to image his own nature and thereby bring him glory.  He created man for his own glory and he created woman for the glory of man. He created woman and by extension marriage to help man fully image him as a husband and father.  Woman was purposefully created as the “weaker vessel” (I Peter 3:7) to symbolize how the people of God are weaker than he is and dependent on his leadership, provision and protection.

So, when people who are Christians or non-Christians attack Biblical gender roles or attack masculinity while elevating femininity, they are in essence elevating mankind to being equal with God.

When we as a culture encourage women to be independent of men and not look to men for their leadership, provision or protection we are symbolizing that mankind does not need God nor should mankind look to God for leadership, provision and protection.

Most secular progressives would stand up and applaud what I just said as they want to rid humanity of worshiping God.  But the Christian Egalitarians on the other hand have a harder task then the secular progressives.  They have to try and keep the parts of the Bible they like while throwing out all this gender symbolism that is seen throughout both the Old and New Testaments.

The Choice Before You

I know we can’t boycott everything.  But changing razors is not a hard thing to do.  I have been using Gillette for probably 20 years, but the next time I go to buy a razor I will associate their brand with this and I will look for an alternative.

As a Christian you have this same choice to make.  Will you stand with a society that has declared war on the masculine nature which is the very image of God? Or will you take a stand not only for masculinity but the God whose image masculinity portrays? Will you fight with your pocket book and your vote for your faith?

I have read and watched many articles and YouTube videos with people saying that the gender roles I teach on this blog straight out of the Bible are “evil”.  Some even go as far as to condemn the God of the Bible as an evil God.  Today many American Christians do not even realize they are worshiping the false American gods of humanity, equality and education.  They give vast amounts of their time and wealth to the furtherance of these American idols.

The choice before you is the same choice Joshua gave to the nation of Israel. Will you call God evil and follow our false American gods or will you serve the one true and living God who created us for his glory?

“And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

Joshua 24:15 (KJV)

Why Husbands Are NOT Accountable to Their Wives

Many Christian teachers teach that husbands and wives should be equally accountable to one another. We are told that neither the husband nor the wife should keep any information back from one another and that this complete transparency is the foundation for a healthy Christian marriage.

Before we get into the Scriptural arguments that proponents of this teaching make, we need to define what it means to be accountable.

Merriam-Webster.com defines “accountable” as “required to explain actions or decisions to someone”.

Dictionary.com defines “accountable” as “subject to the obligation to report, explain, or justify something; responsible; answerable”.

Now that we understand what accountable means we can discuss whether the doctrine of equal accountability between husbands and wives is founded in the teaching of the Bible or just the teachings of our culture.

The Husband and Wife are One Flesh

Christian teachers who teach equal accountability between a husband and wife base their doctrine on the following principle that God says a husband and wife are one flesh in marriage:

“For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.” – Mark 10:7-8

So, the argument basically goes like this.  If a husband and wife are no longer two, but one, then there should be nothing that one knows that the other does not.

The problem with this interpretation of the “one flesh” principle is that the oneness between a husband and wife is not a oneness of equals.

The Scriptures tell us that marriage is a picture of the relationship between Christ and Church:

“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.  For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.  Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.” – Ephesians 5:22-24

Are Christ and his Church equals? Absolutely not.  One leads and one follows.

Is Christ accountable to his Church? Is Christ required to explain his actions or decisions to his Church?  Absolutely not.  Does he sometimes explain his actions? Yes, but he is not required to do so.

Is Christ answerable to his Church? Must he justify whatever he does to his Church? The answer again is absolutely not.

The language of Ephesians chapter five on the position of the husband to the wife is crystal clear.  There is no gray area here.  The husband is the head of the wife “AS” Christ is the head of the Church. Therefore, the husband is not in any way accountable to his wife even though he and his wife are one as the Church is one with Christ.

Does Responsibility Always Equal Accountability?

Does this mean a husband does not have any responsibilities toward his wife? Of course, he does!

After God addresses the duty of the wife to submit to her husband in everything, he addresses the responsibilities of the husband toward his wife:

“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church” – Ephesians 5:25-29

There are several kinds of love in the Bible.  There is an affectionate kind of love that is usually conditionally based upon what a person does for another.  There is a family type of love that is instinctual which describes the love of a parent for a child or a child for a parent.  There is a type of love that is sexually based.  And then there is an unconditional love, which is a love based in a choice and not feelings.  This last kind of love is the one that is the strongest type of love and it is most often associated with God and his actions toward us.  This is the kind of love God commands husbands to have toward their wives in Ephesians chapter 5.

Husbands are called by God to unconditionally choose to love their wives by washing their wife’s spiritual spots and wrinkles with the Word of God (teaching, correcting and rebuking them as necessary), they are to provide for their wife’s physical needs, protect their wife’s body as if it were their own and give their lives to save their wife’s life as Christ did for his Church.

But just because we have responsibilities toward someone does not always mean we are accountable to that person for how we fulfill those responsibilities.

For instance, a teacher is responsible to their students for teaching them the right materials they need to learn.  But they are not accountable to their students for fulfilling those responsibilities, but rather their school leadership.

Another example would be parents.  Parents have many responsibilities toward their children, yet they are not accountable to their children for how they fulfill those responsibilities.

But sometimes we are accountable to the person that we have responsibilities toward.   We as both men and women have many responsibilities toward God and we are also accountable to him for how we fulfill those responsibilities.   But women are also accountable to their husbands for how they fulfill their responsibilities to them as wives and mothers to their children.

Men and Women Were Created Unequal for a Specific Purpose

If a husband and wife were equal partners in marriage, like two equal partners in a business together then yes, they would be required to be completely transparent and there could be no secrets.  All decisions would need to be made jointly and agreed upon together.

That is what the world, and sadly many Christian churches and teachers teach today – that marriage is an equal partnership between a man and a woman.

But the Scriptures are clear in multiple passages throughout the Old and New Testaments that marriage is not a partnership of equals, but rather it is a patriarchy or male lead relationship.  And God did not just flip a coin as some people think “because someone had to be in charge”.

The Scriptures show us that marriage was purposefully designed the way it was as part of God’s larger plan shown in I Corinthians 11:

“For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.  For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.  Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” – I Corinthians 11:7-9

The passage above from I Corinthians that I have just shown you is one that you will not hear in most Churches today.   Instead you will hear all the time how God made man and woman equally in his image.

Most Christian teachers today appeal to the Genesis account to teach that God made man and woman equally in his image:

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” – Genesis 1:27

They teach “See it says male and female created he them.  That means God created both man and woman equally in his image”.  But is that really what that passage teaches? Does it say God created male and female in his image or does it just say that God created male and female? Read the passage again.

And while the Hebrew word for man (“adam”) can be mean mankind there are two reasons that we know it refers specifically to male human beings and not all mankind (men and women). The first reason is the key phrase “created he him” and this refers particularly to Adam, the man, the male.  Therefore, we know that when it says he created man in his image, it is referring specifically to male human beings, not female human beings.   The second reason we know he was not referring to creating both men and women equally in his image is because of Paul’s divine commentary from I Corinthians 11 that we have just mentioned. It clearly states that man is “the image and glory of God” and then uses “but” indicating that woman is NOT the image and glory of God.  Woman is “the glory of man”.

So, it is NOT Scripturally accurate to say that men and women are equally created in God’s image or that God split his image between men and women.

And there is a reason man is created in God’s image and woman is not. Man was created by God to image him, or live out his attributes, and thereby bring him glory.  Woman was created by God for man to help man in is primary mission to image God.  It is not woman’s mission to image God, but rather it is her mission to help man in his mission to image God.

Man could not fully image God without being a husband and father.  Therefore, God had to make woman to be his wife and the mother of his children.  It really is that simple.  A woman who fights to be equal with a man or one who is offended because she is not equal to a man is a woman who has a problem with God’s plan for her life.

The American Egalitarian Lie

I realize what I have just said here is extremely offensive to our culture’s modern egalitarian views.  We are taught in America that everyone is equal and that men and women should have equal rights. And by extension we are taught that marriage is a partnership of equals where all actions and decisions must be discussed and agreed upon because men and women are equal.

The vast majority of Churches and Christian teachers have bowed to our egalitarian culture and in the process many Christian books and articles have been published over the last half century trying to make the Bible fit an egalitarian worldview.  The primary passage that Christian egalitarians use to teach this view is found in the Apostle Paul’s letter to the Galatians.

“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.” – Galatians 3:28

Christian egalitarians use Galatians 3:28 to cancel out the rest of the Bible in regard to gender roles.  It really is a very faulty interpretation of the Bible.  Christian Egalitarians ask us to believe the ridiculous notion that somehow Paul changed his mind about what he wrote in Ephesians 5:22-31 and he just canceled it all out with Galatians 3:28.

And we are also supposed to believe that the Apostle Peter did not get the memo from Paul because he wrote in I Peter 3:1-6 that women were to be in subjection to their husbands and show respectful fear to their husbands and follow Sarah’s example who obeyed her husband and called him lord.

This is why I have maintained for years that you have throw the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy out the door to be a Christian Egalitarian.  There are not mistakes and no contradictions in the Bible. And the Scriptures interpret the Scriptures.

That is why as Bible believing Christians, we know there absolutely no conflict or contradiction between I Corinthians 11:1-16, Ephesians 5:22-31, I Peter 3:1-7 and Galatians 3:28.

I Corinthians 11:1-6 is speaking about the purposes for which God created man and woman and man’s primary mission to image God.  That is why men are not to wear a head covering for worship and prayer and women are.  That is also why God is always referred to in the Bible in the masculine sense as husband, father and son.  It is why Christ had 12 male Apostles. It is why the priests in Israel had to be male.

Ephesians 5:22-31 and I Peter 3:1-7 are speaking to gender roles in marriage as part of God’s larger plan for man to image God and woman to picture the people of God in her submission and service to her husband.

And finally, Galatians 3:28 has absolutely nothing to do with gender roles in this world or marriage.  It is speaking to the subject of salvation! The Apostle Paul was saying men and women, Jews and Greeks, slaves and freemen could all be saved and be a part of the body of Christ.

But Accountability Keeps Us Out of Sin!

Some would argue that even though the husband does not have to be accountable to his wife, because he is her head as Christ is the head of the Church, that he still should be accountable to her to keep from sinning.

I think accountability partners are a great thing to have in our spiritual life.  I have several of them where we confess to one another when we fail and try to encourage one another in in our walk with God.

The Scriptures give us the following admonitions that I believe support the concept of having accountability partners.

Accountability Partners Sharpen Our Character and Make us Better Christians

“Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.” – Proverbs 27:17

Accountability Partners Give Us Someone to Confess Our Fault To

“Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” – James 5:16

Accountability Partners Keep Our Secrets

“A talebearer revealeth secrets: but he that is of a faithful spirit concealeth the matter.” – Proverbs 11:13

Accountability Partners Tell Us When We Are Wrong

“Faithful are the wounds of a friend; but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful.” – Proverbs 27:6

Accountability Partners Encourage Us to Keep Doing What is Right

“Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.” – 1 Thessalonians 5:11

So, yes accountability partners are a great thing for us all to have as Christians.   But that then leads us to our next point.

Why A Husband Should NOT Make His Wife His Accountability Partner

So, after reading all of the previous passages you might be asking “Why should a man’s wife not be one of his accountability partners?”

There really are two reasons.

The first reason is that it undermines his authority by making him spiritually accountable to his subordinate.  The reason a husband should not have his wife as an accountability partner is same reason a Pastor should not have one his members be his accountability partner.  Accountability partners should ALWAYS be equals, and never subordinates.

The second reason a husband should not have his wife as an accountability partner is because of the simple fact that she is a woman.  Men and women are different.  We have very different spiritual struggles and very different natures.  A man cannot fully comprehend or understand the spiritual struggles of a woman nor can a woman fully comprehend the spiritual struggles of a man.

That is why the Scriptures even encourage gender segregated spiritual mentoring:

“But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:

That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience.

The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;  That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

Young men likewise exhort to be sober minded.” – Titus 2:1-6

So, again Accountability partners are great.  But wives should not be accountability partners for their husbands because they are their husband’s subordinate and because they are women and cannot fully relate to the spiritual struggles of a man.

Why Women Want to Know Everything About Their Husbands

The Bible talks about women wanting to know everything about the people around them (which would include their husbands) and how they can get into trouble with this part of their nature:

“And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not. I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.” – 1 Timothy 5:13-14

And just as marriage helps to keep couples from fornication (I Corinthians 7:2-5) so too we are told that marriage is the answer to keeping women from being tattlers, busy bodies and speaking things they ought not to.

Women need men to keep them in line. 

To say such a thing today would be called “sexist”.  But this is what God’s Word says.  It almost makes you think that maybe, just maybe our post feminist world has it all wrong and the old “sexist” world while not being perfect was far more closely aligned to God’s Word than ours is today.

In fact, the very first sin woman committed had to do with her seeking out knowledge that was forbidden to her (Genesis 3:6). But it is not just a woman’s lust for knowledge, but also her lust for power that drives her to make her husband accountable to her.

In the Genesis account we read the following:

“Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” – Genesis 3:16

And God’s statement to Eve mirrors what he said to Cain:

“If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.” – Genesis 4:7

So, as we can see, in the same way that Cain’s sin nature desired to control him, but he had to rule over it, so too a woman’s sinful nature causes her to try to control her husband, but he must rule over her.

Wives, It is Not for You to Know

How many TV shows have you seen where a woman breaks up with a man for keeping something a secret? And I don’t mean him cheating with another woman.  I mean any secret.  Women in our post-feminist culture have been taught that they can expect their men to tell them everything.  Anything held back by the man from the woman is considered a breach of trust and could possibly end the relationship.

For Christian wives reading this – what would your reaction be if you asked your husband to read his email and he said “it is not for you to know”.  What if you asked him for his password for his phone or social media accounts and he said “it is not for you to know”.  If you are like most American women you would be infuriated.  Because you have been brought up in a culture that teaches you that you are an equal partner with your husband in your marriage and you entitled to know everything he knows and everything about him.

What if your husband decided to lock you out of the bank and manage the finances completely on his own? Most American women would completely rebel.  But do you know who says to his wife “it is not for you to know”?

“And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.” – Acts 1:7

That’s right. It was Jesus Christ himself.

Conclusion

It is utterly amazing to me how many modern Christian teachers grab Ephesians 5:25’s statement “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it” and then the just fill in whatever they think what that love means.

Modern Christian teachers teach that Jesus was a husband that lived to make his wife happy. But the Bible teaches that Jesus was a husband that lived to make his wife holy (Ephesians 5:26-27).

Modern Christian teachers teach that Jesus was a husband who never corrected his wife or tried to change her. But the Bible teaches us that Christ washes his wife’s spiritual spots and wrinkles with the Word of God to make her the wife he wants her to be (Ephesians 5:26-27).  It also teaches us that he rebukes and chastens his wife out love for her (Revelation 3:19).

Modern Christian teachers teach Jesus was a husband who was completely transparent with his wife and held nothing back from her. But the Bible teaches us that Christ does indeed hold things back from his wife and tells her there are things that are not for her to know (Acts 1:7).

Christian wives – I know a lot of the Scriptures and information I have given you here might be new to you.  It might even be offensive to you.  But it is what the Word of God teaches.

You will find absolutely no Scriptural support for a lot of what you hear and read today in Christian circles that basically teaches partnership marriage.  Sadly, some Christian groups pretend that they teach male headship only to gut it making the man nothing more than a figure head leader.

This is not about a power trip.  This is not about men hating on you as a woman or trying to make your life miserable. It is about God’s design.

So, what you need to do is follow the admonition of the Apostle Paul when he wrote:

“And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” – Romans 12:2

You need to renew your mind.  You need to unlearn the feminist and egalitarian teachings you grew up with in school and church and maybe even in your own family.  That is tough process. It won’t be easy and it will take time.  But if you yield to the Holy Spirit you can do it with his help.

Also, before I conclude with the men, I want to clarify something for you ladies on the subject of accountability partners.  While I think it is great and valuable for women to mentor and be accountability partners with other women it needs to be the right kind of women.  It needs to be a spiritual woman who will not contradict your husband’s spiritual leadership.  In addition, you are still accountable to your husband as well because he is your spiritual head.

In practical terms, that means if your husband wants to know your passwords for your phone, email and social media accounts you must give it to him but he does not and I would argue should not give this same information to you.  Why? Because as I said before he is your authority and you are his subordinate.  He is responsible for monitoring and if necessary, correcting your behavior, but you do not have that same right and responsibility toward him.

Also, if you want to find out what it really means to be one flesh with your husband and how to have unity in your marriage see my article “Why unity in marriage has more to do with the wife than the husband”.

Now to Christian men.

I advise you to follow Paul’s admonition below:

“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.” – 1 Corinthians 16:13 (NASB)

The Bible does not just call you to be a figure head leader as some churches teach today, but it tells you that you are to be “One that ruleth well his own house” (I Timothy 3:4).  You are to be a ruler, not just a leader.

Do not undermine your spiritual authority by making yourself accountable to your wife. Make yourself accountable to other good Christian men, but not your wife.  But realize at the end of the day the one you are truly accountable to is Christ who is your head (I Corinthians 11:3).

You are the head of your wife as Christ is the head of the Church (Ephesians 5:23).  Your wife is not spiritually accountable for you to God, but rather you are spiritually accountable for her to God.  You are tasked with teaching her (1 Corinthians 14:35) and washing her spiritual spots and blemishes with the Word of God (Ephesians 5:25-27).

And I encourage you to read Romans 12:2 as well and seek the renewal of your mind through the help of the Holy Spirit.  You must unlearn what our American culture has raised you with and replace that with the truth of God’s Word.  This is the only way you can truly fulfill your mission as a man to image God with your life and thereby bring him glory.

Does the Bible Teach that Women are Second Class Citizens?

I recently received an email from a woman asking for Scriptural proof that that God does not want women to be treated as second class citizens.  She could have sent this email to a lot of Christian sites and they may have sent her back Scriptures that they believe support the idea that women should be treated completely equal with men.

The most common Scripture passage used to try and say the Bible supports equal rights for women is found in the Apostle Paul’s letter to the Galatians:

“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.” Galatians 3:28 (KJV)

The advocates for woman’s rights hail this verse saying that it teaches that God intends for there to be absolutely no distinction and thus completely equal rights between men and women. But is this passage from Galatians God’s complete revelation on the subject of gender? We will explore the answer to that question later in this article.

I have changed the name of the woman who wrote me to Lauren in order protect her anonymity as she gave me her real name in the email.  What follows are several statements from her in the email and my response to her showing her from the Bible what God’s Word says on this issue.

LAUREN’S STATEMENT:

“I am raising daughters that have been in an environment that teaches them that women are second class… Do you know any podcast, bible verses, bible studies, websites, etc that can guide them back to trusting the Bible as God’s word and that the verses are not intending women to be second class citizens?”

MY RESPONSE:

First, we need to define what treating someone like a “second class citizen” is.  In common language usage today treating someone like a second-class citizen would be to show disdain for them or mistreat them in some way.  If we were talking about treating with disdain or hatred we can easily show that Biblically speaking this is wrong.  We are to be kind to all people no matter what their race, gender or ethnicity is.   We are also to treat others as we would want to be treated as Christ exhorted us in what has become known as “The Golden Rule”:

“Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.” Matthew 7:12 (KJV)

But often times this rule that we should treat others as we would want to be treated is vastly abused by many to cancel out entire sections of the Scriptures.

I get people writing me all the time saying “You only believe the way you do because you are a man and it is advantageous to you to believe in Biblical Gender Roles.  If you were a woman you would not so easily believe in such things.”   You know what my response is to such assertions? I tell them if I was a woman like my mother or my daughter or many other godly women I knew growing up I would absolutely believe the way I do about Biblical Gender Roles.  I don’t believe in Biblical Gender Roles because it is advantageous to me as a man – I believe in Biblical Gender Roles because that it is what the Bible teaches.

Trust me, it is not easy living counter to the culture you live in.  It is also not as easy as women think to be a man especially in this day when masculinity is attacked and women no longer respect men. Marriage has become more of a battlefield today than it ever was thanks to feminism poisoning the minds of women. Many men have just given up and given the reigns to their wife and they do whatever she says and whatever makes her happy.  That is taking the easy and cowardly way out.

Returning back to the subject of women being treated as second-class citizens – we are not talking about mistreating women in the sense of treating them with disdain, dishonor or unkindness by Biblical standards.

The key phrase in my last statement is “by Biblical standards”.   Our culture has a whole different set of standards by which women are said to be treated with disdain, dishonor and in an inhumane way.  Before I speak to this let me give a dictionary definition of a “second class citizen” according to https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/us/second-class_citizen:

“A person belonging to a social or political group whose rights and opportunities are inferior to those of the dominant group in a society.”

So, if one social group of people has inferior rights and opportunities to that of some other dominant group than they are said to be treated as second class citizens.

American and Western culture in general have devised a new standard of treating someone as “less than a person” or treating someone in “an inhumane way”.  The standard is equal rights.  If a culture has different classes of people with different classes of rights then they are said to be treating those people with hatred, disdain and in an inhumane manner.  No one is allowed to question this modern definition of treating someone in an inhumane way.

In fact, in America we have sacrificed the doctrines of our Christian faith as well as our marriages and many other things on the altar to our false god of equality.  It is ok if we worship the Christian god too, as long as our service to the god of equality comes first.

So now the question then becomes does the Bible advocate for women to be treated as second class citizens to men according to the dictionary definition I just gave?

The answer simply put is YES.  The Bible does in fact advocate for women to be treated as second class citizens to men if “second class citizen” simply means they are to have less rights and opportunities than men.

In fact, women occupy the second of three social classes of humanity that God designed.

The Three Social Classes Ordained by God

Contrary to modern Western and American ideals about equality God’s original design of mankind features a social order with three classes of people.

God’s First-Class Citizen – Man as God’s Image Bearer

“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Genesis 1:27 (KJV)

There are a great number of Christian theologians that misread this famous Biblical account of the creation of man and woman.  This passage does NOT teach that God created “them” (male and female) in his image. It clearly states “in the image of God created he HIM”. Many Christian teachers (even non-feminist teachers) have tried to argue that because “man” can refer to mankind that this can mean “So God created mankind in his own image”.  That is absolutely true that sometimes “man” (or Adam as it is in the original Hebrew) can refer to an individual man or mankind in general. The problem with this interpretation in this particular passage is found in the second phrase with the word “him” which is a translation of the Hebrew phrase “eth haa-‘adam” which literally means “this same man”.

So in Genesis 1:27 the Scriptures are telling us “God created Adam in his own image, in the image of God created he this same Adam.  Male and Female created he them.”

This passage tells us two very important truths.  God created man (male human beings) in his image and also that he created women as well.  It does not say he created women in his image, only that he created women.

And if there was any doubt as to the correct interpretation of this passage God gave the Apostle Paul this divine commentary on Genesis account:

“For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.” I Corinthians 11:7 (KJV)

God’s Second-Class Citizen – Woman the helper to man

“And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.” – Genesis 2:18 (KJV)

In Genesis chapter 2 we see that God did not want Adam to be alone and so he created a helper for him.  Now a helper can be one in authority (like a manager who helps his workers), a helper can be an equal partner or a helper can be a subordinate.  So which kind of helper did not create Eve to be? The Genesis account tells us that Adam named her type “woman” and later he even gave her personal name which was Eve.  This was a sign that she would be a subordinate helper, not an authority helper nor an equal partner.  Throughout the Old Testament this is maintained when we see that men ruled over women and that husbands could override any decision of their wives and fathers could override any decision of their daughters (Numbers 30).

Multiple New Testament passages confirm that woman was designed by God to be a subordinate helper to man.

“Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; 2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.” I Peter 3:1-2 (KJV)

“22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.” Ephesians 5:22-24 (KJV)

God designed woman to be man’s subordinate helper in many ways.  She helps him by bearing and caring for his home and his children (1 Timothy 5:14). She helps him by being a faithful companion (Proverbs 31:11, Malachi 2:14). She helps him by bringing him sexual pleasure (Proverbs 5:15-19).  But another way she helps her husband is simply by being “the weaker vessel” (1 Timothy 5:14) and needing his leadership, provision and protection.  A man cannot fully image God as he was designed to do without being a husband and father and woman helps him in this way to fulfill image God to his fullest capability.

So, if you are asking “Why did God make women to be second class citizens?” the answer is found in a passage we just stated above:

“For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.” Ephesians 5:23 (KJV)

Not only was man made to image God and thus bring glory to him but marriage between a man and woman was made by God to model the relationship between God and his people. So, by fully embracing their status as second-class citizens to men women help men to fully image God and also model the relationship between God and his people.

To our equality obsessed world this makes no sense but this is why we as Christians are called to honor women for being the second-class citizens God designed them to be (I Peter 3:7).

Let me put this another way.  God could have made a partner for man that was his equal in every way. In fact, God could have created man as a hermaphrodite (with both sexes) and then humans could have just chosen any other human as partners. They could have equally broken up the division of having children, caring for the home, leading, providing and protecting.  If what I just said sounds familiar it is because this is exactly what our culture does today.  We promote homosexuality and gender equality – both ideologies which are in direct contradiction to God’s Word and his design.

But if humans existed in pair bonded relationships as equals this would not have properly modeled the relationship of God to his people.  Only if there were two genders with one dependent on the other for their leadership, provision and protection could the relationship of God to his people be properly modeled.

God’s Third-Class Citizen – Children as God’s inheritance to man

“Lo, children are an heritage of the Lord: and the fruit of the womb is his reward.  4 As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. 5 Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.” Psalm 127:3-5 (KJV)

While man does not create life in exactly the same way God does – God wanted man to have a taste of his ability to create life and in this way, he blessed man with the ability to father children.

Children help both men and women to fulfill their God given God given roles by having someone who needs their care and support.  Children help men to exercise their father role in the way God is father to his children.

Summary of God’s three ordained social classes

Now let’s summarize the three classes and how they relate to one another. Men are to be the image bearers of God. One of the ways a man images God is by loving his wife as Christ loved his Church. Another way a man images God is by loving his children as God loves his children.  Women are to show respect and deference toward men in general and specific obedience and submission toward their father and later their husband.  Children are to show respect and deference to adult men and women and they are specifically to obey and honor their father and mother.  This is God’s original creation design and order of humanity.

A fourth social class allowed by God because of Sin

Sin’s entrance into the world resulted in crime, laziness, poverty and war.  These four human conditions would necessitate that God allow for a fourth class of citizen which is that of a slave.

“If a countryman of yours becomes so poor with regard to you that he sells himself to you, you shall not subject him to a slave’s service.  He shall be with you as a hired man, as if he were a sojourner; he shall serve with you until the year of jubilee.  He shall then go out from you, he and his sons with him, and shall go back to his family, that he may return to the property of his forefathers.  For they are My servants whom I brought out from the land of Egypt; they are not to be sold in a slave sale.  You shall not rule over him with severity, but are to revere your God.  As for your male and female slaves whom you may have—you may acquire male and female slaves from the pagan nations that are around you.  Then, too, it is out of the sons of the sojourners who live as aliens among you that you may gain acquisition, and out of their families who are with you, whom they will have produced in your land; they also may become your possession.  You may even bequeath them to your sons after you, to receive as a possession; you can use them as permanent slaves. But in respect to your countrymen, the sons of Israel, you shall not rule with severity over one another.”  Leviticus 25:39-46 (NASB)

While God allowed for slavery he also specifically gave rules regarding the humane treatment of slaves and the conditions under which slavery may occur.  The version of slavery that occurred in North and South America neither met the conditions allowed for slavery or the treatment of slaves.  See my article “Why Christians should not be ashamed of Slavery in the Bible” for more on this subject.

Is a woman’s second-class status only applicable if she is married or living with her father?

Some might think by the passages I mentioned previously that a woman’s second-class status only applies to her if she is married or perhaps is still a young woman living at home with her father.  Such thinking is flawed and does not take into account the entire witness of the Scriptures.  Yes, God allows and even praises celibacy in both women and men (I Corinthians 7).  However, celibacy is God’s exception to his first command to mankind to “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28) and to keep this command men and women must marry, have sex and have children.

Even if a woman feels called by God to celibacy in his service this does not remove her second-class status.  Paul’s divine commentary on the Genesis account of the creation of man and woman makes this clear.

“3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.

5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. 6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.”

I Corinthians 11:3-10 (KJV)

This is one of the most controversial and most un-preached passages in modern churches today. Why? Because it blows away our entire “equality based society”.  Men and women are equal in their humanity because woman was taken from man. However, Paul explains why women were to wear head coverings in worship services – because they were to reflect the order of God’s creation.  Notice there is no mention in this passage of marriage or the relationship between a husband and wife. Instead this speaks to the social order between men and women in general.  This is why women regardless of their marital status are to wear a sign of authority on their head when they come to worship.

LAUREN’S STATEMENT:

 “We attended home church and was told that women are to be submissive to their husbands, and not speak in the church.”

MY RESPONSE:

If you had church services in your home (as many churches do) then your husband would be right in teaching that you and your daughters should remain silent and simply listen during the spiritual instruction given by the men.  This is actually very clearly taught in the Scriptures.

“11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.” 1 Timothy 2:11-13 (KJV)

Now does these mean women can never speak in their home because it is also used for church services? No.  Paul even commands that elder women are to teach younger women in the Lord when he writes:

“3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” Titus 2:1-5 (KJV)

So, it is perfectly Biblical for elder women in the Lord to conduct women’s Bible studies in their home or maintain blogs online with other women as long as this occurs under the authority of their husbands.  The women teaching should teach what is in accordance with their husband’s teachings and the women attending should do so with their husband’s permission.

LAUREN’S STATEMENT:

 “Some of the men in the church were not very caring and loving husbands and they did not honor their wives.  Last year I realized that my efforts to be a proverbs 31 wife has led me to have a relationship that is not what I consider to be what God wants.  My husband is verbally abusive, self-centered, and has neglected his role as Father and Husband.”

MY RESPONSE:

Who determines if a husband is acting in a caring or loving way toward his wife or honoring his wife? I can tell you who does not determine this.  Neither his wife nor his children. Ultimately it is God himself who judges whether your husband is caring and loving to you and honoring you in the way God expects of him.  And how does he determine God’s will in these areas? By examining the Scriptures and how God loves his wife.

Now this is not to say that men should not listen to the counsel of other men whether it be their fathers or their pastors or other spiritually mature men in the Lord.  The Scriptures tell us “Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety.” (Proverbs 11:14).  Also, men should hear their wife’s concerns but men must weigh their wife’s concerns by the Word of God. Is what she is asking for within the commands or example of God’s love toward his wife? Maybe.  But is it also possible that how a wife feels her husband should care for her and love her is not warranted or commanded by the Scriptures? Could she actually be selfishly ambitious for a type of love that God does not entitle her to?

For instance, what is verbally abusive? If a man simply raises his voice to his wife is that verbally abusive? You won’t find that anywhere in the Scriptures. If a man calls his wife foolish for acting or talking in a certain way is that verbally abusive? No – in fact we have the example of one of the most righteous men in the Bible doing just that with his wife and the Scriptures tell us he did not sin in doing so (Job 2:10).

LAUREN’S STATEMENT:

“As my daughters are growing up they are rejecting this unfair situation and are questioning the Bible.  They see how there are many verses that are not in favor of women and that we are not as entitled as men… My daughters are losing interest in the Bible as they feel how can God want us to be treated unfairly and they also think that because men wrote the Bible that their sin and attitude about women is revealed in their writing.”

MY RESPONSE:

If I had a dime for every woman that wrote me over the past few years saying something like this “Thanks for confirming for me from the Bible why I never want to be a Christian” or “Thanks for helping me to leave the Christian faith your gender role teachings” I would be a wealthy man. The Atheist emails are especially humorous with their “I love your site – keep up the good preaching! You will convert everyone to atheists like me.”

I have had others write me things like “Please stop teaching these gender role doctrines.  The Gospel is the most important thing people need to believe but people will never come to hear the Gospel if they first hear these gender role doctrines.  Let them discover these passages on their own and decide for themselves what they believe.  Stop putting a stumbling block for people coming to Christ.”

What are all these complaints really saying? They are saying that Christians need to leave behind anything in the Bible that conflicts with our modern culture.  We need to teach people what makes them feel good and things that match the values of our culture or so we are told.  A lot of big churches today do just that.  Even many small churches do this.  The sad fact is only a small percentage of Christian Churches today follow Paul’s example when he stated in Acts 20:27 “for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.” 

The fact is the doctrines of Biblical gender roles are part of “the whole counsel of God”.  Pastors and Christian teachers do exactly what the Apostle Paul warned them NOT to do:

“1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” 2 Timothy 4:1-4 (KJV)

What do most Pastors and Christian teachers do today? They teach only what their congregation’s itching ears want to hear.  They have conformed themselves to the pattern of this world and the culture we live instead of transforming their minds and seeing the sin that the lays before them in our culture as the Bible exhorts us to do:

“And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” Romans 12:2 (KJV)

We need to pray for preachers who will once again not be afraid to preach “Thus saith the Lord”.

But Christ didn’t treat women as second-class citizens!

The truth is that there are many Christian Pastors and teachers today that “preacheth another Jesus” (II Corinthians 11:4).  The Christ they preach is a feminized Christ who is not Lord of all, but one who bows the knee to the false god of equality.

Some online articles try and point to the fact that Jesus broke some social norms of his age when it came to interactions with women and that somehow shows he was a feminist or rejected patriarchy as I have shown the Bible clearly supports.

Their supposed evidence for this is that Jesus encouraged women to sit and listen to him rather than doing house work while he taught (Luke 10:38-42), he spoke to a Samaritan woman (John 4:6-30) or that he had women followers who came along with his disciples.

None of these actions by Christ prove one iota that Christ did not in fact treat women as second-class citizens to men.  What it proves is that he believed the men had had gone too far in forbidding women to hear the teaching of God’s Word (which many did).

Did Christ have even one of his twelve Apostles whom he commissioned to build his Church be a woman? No, he did not. Did Christ one time tell women they should be social equals with men? No, he did not.  Did he tell women not to submit to their husbands? No, he did not.

But the biggest problem with saying Jesus Christ believed in treating women completely equal with men is the fact that his Word says otherwise! Remember that what the Prophets before Christ and the Apostles after Christ wrote came directly from God.  Some Christians falsely believe that the words Christ spoke while he walked among men are more authoritative then the words he gave to his Apostles after he ascended to heaven. To attack the teachings of the Apostles like Peter and Paul regarding gender roles is to attack Christ himself who gave them his Word.

Conclusion

We have shown that those who use Paul’s statement that “there is neither male nor female“ in Galatians 3:28 and Christ’s actions in teaching women have built a false platform of support of equal rights for women.  When we examine the whole counsel of God as found in the entirety of the Scriptures we see this is not the case.

If you are a Christian woman who feels as Lauren and her daughters do toward your husband, father or just men in general this is what you need to do.  You need to heed the words of the Apostle James where he wrote:

“13 Who is wise and understanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, by deeds done in the humility that comes from wisdom. 14 But if you harbor bitter envy and selfish ambition in your hearts, do not boast about it or deny the truth. 15 Such “wisdom” does not come down from heaven but is earthly, unspiritual, demonic. 16 For where you have envy and selfish ambition, there you find disorder and every evil practice.” James 3:13-16 (NIV)

As a woman who feels the way Lauren and her daughters do – you need to recognize your feelings for what they are when measured against the Word of God.  If you desire anything God did not intend for you to have that is by definition selfish ambition.  If you are desire the status that someone else has that is envy.

If you as a woman desire to be a first-class citizen – meaning to have all the rights and privileges of a man, then you have selfish ambition and envy in your heart.  You need to get down on your knees and pray the prayer of David in Psalm 51:10 where he prays “Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.” You need to fully embrace your position as the weaker vessel and your place in God’s design.

If you are a father, husband or teachers of God’s Word you must have the courage to stand firm against the evil attitudes and ambitions in the women of our age.

“Be on the alert, stand firm in the faith, act like men, be strong.”

I Corinthians 16:13 (NASB)

Why you should teach your daughter NOT to be independent

This famous cartoon created by Laura Foster in 1912, an opponent of women’s suffrage, has proven to be absolutely true a century after the passage of woman’s suffrage. A new study released this week confirms “women’s greater economic independence” as a contributing factor of rising cohabitation rates and declining marriage rates in the United States.

Here is more of the story from Reuters:

“More Americans 50 years and older are copying younger generations and eschewing marriage, opting instead to live with their partners, according to new research.

In 2016 about 18 million Americans were cohabiting, defined as living with an unmarried partner, and nearly a quarter of them were people over 50, an increase of 75 percent since 2007, data released on Thursday from Pew Research Center showed…

Government figures show that so-called “gray divorce,” or splits among adults 50 and over, has about doubled since the 1990s and could partly account for the increase in cohabitation.

Fewer marriages, changing social norms and women’s greater economic independence are other explanations for the rise, Stepler added.

As cohabiting has gone up, the marriage rate in the United States has dropped, from 8.2 per 1,000 population in 2000 to 6.9 in 2014, according to figures from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Stepler also pointed to an increase in the number of older Americans who have never married. Pew found that 27 percent of people 50 years and older who are cohabiting have never married, while more than half are divorced and 13 percent are widowed.”

Whenever reports like this come up about declining marriage rates and rising cohabitations rates you have to look very closely to see the actual cause buried in the fine print that no one wants to address.

Newtons third law of physics states:

“For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction”

And this law of physics actually applies to changes in society as well.  If you take social “action” there will always be “an equal and opposite reaction” in society for the betterment or worsening of society.

While this report tries to show “fewer marriages, changing social norms and women’s greater economic independence” as factors in the rise of cohabitation rates and decline of marriage they are not really three different causes.  Fewer marriages and changing social norms (the acceptability of cohabiting outside of marriage) are a direct result of women’s greater economic independence and what gave women greater economic independence? The women’s rights movement, the movement to make women be social equals with men that started in the mid 1800’s.

The Driving forces of Marriage before Feminism

For the history of mankind women had fewer rights than men. Women were for the most part owned by men.  Few women owned property and still fewer women held positions of power.  The result was that women were compelled to seek out marriage to men for their economic prosperity.

In fact, in many cases women did not even chose whom they would marry but rather their fathers did.  Often men would literally purchase their wives from the woman’s father.

This was the simple formula that served as the foundation of the human family for all of human civilization:

Man seeks out woman for her beauty, sexual pleasure, bearing his children, caring for them and caring for the affairs of his home. 

Woman seeks man for his protection and provision.

America and other westernized nations have neutralized both of these primary historical drivers of marriage for women and replaced it with something that was rarely if ever a driver for marriage before the modern times – romantic feelings.

Governments have now granted rights to women to be socially and economically equal with men and for those women who still cannot support themselves the government will step in and help through welfare benefits.  Modern police forces provide all the protection women need so again in this area women do not need a husband anymore.

So now romance is the only driver for marriage If a man sufficiently worships a woman telling her how wonderful she is and agreeing to support her as her equal companion in whatever she chooses whether it is a career or having children she will grant him the privilege of marrying her.

And since she has no need from him other than his emotional support of her and constant worshiping of her if either of these things diminishes there is no need for the marriage to continue.

This change in the foundation for marriage has directly lead to a decline in marriage itself.  Because after all if marriage is just based on feelings – why does anyone need a paper? Why make a commitment that will just cause more complications? Live on feelings and when the feelings are gone each person can go their separate ways.

This is not just about economics but about spirituality

As Christians, we know there is much more going on here than just the destabilization of marriage because of the economic independence of women.  We know that marriage is about more than just a mutually beneficial economic relationship (although God did intend for it to be a mutually beneficial relationship as well).

The Bible shows that God designed marriage as a spiritual symbol of the relationship between himself and his people:

 “23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing…

28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. 29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:”

Ephesians 5:23-24 & 28-29(KJV)

The Biblical model of marriage is simple.

Man loves his wife by leading her, protecting her and providing for her as Christ does the Church.  Woman submits to and serves her husband as the Church submits to and serves Christ.

The Bible show us specifically how a wife serves her husband in this world:

She serves him by making herself affectionate, beautiful and sexually pleasing him

“19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.”

Proverbs 5:19 (KJV)

She serves him by bearing his children and caring for the domestic needs of his home

“I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.”

1 Timothy 5:14 (KJV)

This is the model of marriage that our creator designed.  While human beings imperfectly followed this model for thousands of years it served human civilization well.

But then we thought we knew better than God.  We overturned thousands of years of civilization for an experiment with women’s rights and women’s independence. We broke God’s model for not only marriage but society at large – that model was patriarchy. And now we are reaping the consequences of that decision.

As a direct result of feminism, marriage as an institution is crumbling and women are having so few children that western nations can only keep their populations growing by importing people from less developed nations. Third world nations from Central and South America and Africa are overrunning Europe and America as a direct result of our failed experiment with equal rights for women.

What can we do in the face of this disaster?

The Scriptures tell us “If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?” (Psalm 11:3).

It can be very disheartening to those of us who recognize the collapse of our culture and soon as a result the collapse of our nation.

We must restore the foundation for our society one family at a time and that foundation begins with Jesus Christ himself:

“For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.”

1 Corinthians 3:11 (KJV)

But then what is next? We must build upon his Word as given by his Apostles and Prophets in the Bible:

“19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone

Ephesians 2:19-20 (KJV)

In keeping with the Word of God as our foundation we must teach women NOT to be independent of men but rather we should teach our daughters to depend on us as their fathers as we all should depend on our heavenly father.

We should teach them what God’s word says a young woman’s primary goals should be:

“I will therefore that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully.”
1 Timothy 5:14 (KJV)

There is not one passage in all the Bible that encourages women’s independence from men.  Not one.  And we as Christian parents continue to do a disservice to our society when we encourage our daughter’s independence but more importantly we sin against God’s design for men and women in this world when we do this.

It is up to Christian fathers and mothers to encourage our daughters to play the part that God has given them to play.  When we return to doing things God’s way – we will reap the benefits not only in our families and churches but in our societies and nations as well.

Should we discourage our daughters from being educated?

This question will certainly be asked in the face of my advocating for parents not to teach their daughters to be independent of men.  In fact , women not being educated was one of the ways in which society for thousands of years discouraged women’s independence.

However, I don’t think as Christians we need to completely discourage our daughters from being educated.  The Bible tells us in Proverbs 31:26 of the virtuous wife that she “She openeth her mouth with wisdom” and in the New Testament elder women are encouraged to teach younger women in the Lord:

“3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; 4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Titus 2:3-5 (KJV)

But we should teach our daughters that their education should be channeled toward the primary directives God has for them to marry, bear children and keep their future home in order. If they are pursuing education fields that are not supportive of those goals then that may be questioned.

I am not saying women can’t learn history or science or other such subjects even though they don’t directly relate to her home making duties.  Especially when we know that if she is going to home school or even help her children with their homework as mothers should she needs to have some knowledge of these subjects.

But we as parents should always be cognizant of the direction our daughters are taking.   We must ask a simple question in any activity our daughter undertakes:

Will this be a help or a hindrance to her following God’s directive for her to eventually marry, bear children and guide the domestic affairs of her home?

If we feel the answer is that it will be a hindrance  – then we should discourage whatever it is.

Being a stay at home mom should be illegal?

“We should make it a legal requirement that all parents of children of school-age or older are gainfully employed…So long as we as a nation cling to the lie that only a stay-at-home mum is best placed to assume the responsibilities of caregiver then working fathers will continue to feel insecure about stepping off the corporate treadmill to spend more time with their children.” This is the advice given by Australian journalist Sarrah Le Marquand writing for the Daily Telegraph in Australia.

Her advice comes as a result of public outcry in Australia regarding a study that recommended stay at home moms would be better off in the work place then at home:

“It’s the topic of stay-at-home mums. More specifically, the release of any data or analysis that dares recommend Australian women should get out of the living room/kitchen/nursery and back into the workforce.

So the outcry has been predictable in the wake of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) recent report which had the audacity to suggest stay-at-home mums would be better off putting their skills to use in paid employment.”

Now to be fair to Sarrah Le Marquand she has advocated for women to be able to choose to stay at home with their children until they reach school age:

“And yes, the role played by parents in the early months and years following the birth of a child is vital and irreplaceable. It also stands to reason that for many (but certainly not all) families, it is the mother who opts to take time off work during this period to solely focus on caring for her baby.

Once again, there is nothing wrong with this. In fact, that time at home should be a privilege afforded to more new mums, which is why a few years back I was a lone voice in supporting Tony Abbott’s grossly misunderstood and thus ill-fated paid parental leave scheme, which proposed all female employees receive their normal salary for six months.”

So this is Sarrah Le Marquand’s full position – she is arguing in this article that while women should have the choice to stay at home with their children while they are infants and younger, once they reach school age they should be forced by law to enter the work force full time alongside their husbands.

Near the end of the article she reveals what the ultimate goal of her advocating for forcing stay at home moms back into the workforce is:

“Only when the tiresome and completely unfounded claim that “feminism is about choice” is dead and buried (it’s not about choice, it’s about equality) will we consign restrictive gender stereotypes to history.”

The last line says it all. Forcing stay at home moms to enter the work force would be the final assault on gender roles as God designed them.

This is the logical progression of equality movements.  When you don’t get the results you want, then you use the government to force the results you want.  When you don’t have of the racial or ethnic representation in a given area whether it be higher education or certain areas of employment you force it through government quotas. When women don’t make the same amount as men you force it by taking away merit based pay systems. And when some women refuse to try and make themselves equal with their husbands by working outside the home like their husbands – you force it upon them.

Is it really better for both genders when women leave the home for careers?

I get emails and comments on a regular basis from women who after years have pursuing careers outside the home have come to regret that decision.

Recently I received the following comments from a woman that had what she described was her “dream job” as the chief editor of a newspaper only to realize the devastating impact her career had on her children and her marriage.

“Since the advent of feminism, women have in fact become slaves to the status quo and materialism. Children are being raised by institutions and strangers and, frankly, the consequences of that alone have been terrifying to watch unfold. Homes are falling apart and marriages are crumbling. Every woman struggles with going back to work after having a baby…

I am a mother to three girls, and over the past 11 years, I’ve worked and stayed home for periods of time. I am currently working in what I thought was my “dream job” as the chief editor of a newspaper, but this decision has brought my family and marriage nothing but pain and stress. My husband and I have prayerfully decided that, after the end of this year, I will stay home again and care for our family, permanently this time. I will not return to work again.

Although our budget is tighter when we don’t have two incomes, we are infinitely happier and, as this is God’s will for our family, He always provides abundantly for us.”

This woman’s experience is by no means unique. It happens to millions of women across the western world who buy into feminism’s lie to women that “you can have it all”.  When we break God’s gender roles that he has assigned to man and woman we will reap the consequences both on an individual level as well as a societal level.

But there is more than just anecdotal evidence to support the premise that the mass exodus of women from being keepers at home to career women has been bad for western culture.

See these comments from a study entitled “THE RISE OF DIVORCE AND SEPARATION IN THE UNITED STATES, 1880–1990”:

“Marital dissolution for reasons other than widowhood has increased dramatically over the course of the past century. Only about 5% of marriages contracted in 1867 ended in divorce, but over one-half of marriages contracted in 1967 are expected to end in divorce (Cherlin 1992; Preston and MacDonald 1979). Scholars and commentators have consistently explained this change as a product of the changing sexual division of labor. Writing in 1893, Durkheim (1960 [1893]) pointed to the sexual division of labor as a source of interdependence between men and women, producing what he called “organic solidarity.”

Less conservative scholars use different terminology, but most stress the same agent of change. They argue that the rise in economic opportunities for women was a necessary condition for the increase in divorce and separation (Cherlin 1992; Degler 1980; McLanahan 1991; Ross and Sawhill 1975). According to this interpretation, women in the past who lacked independent means of support were often trapped in bad marriages; as the opportunities for female wage-labor expanded, women were increasingly able to escape and live on their own. Thus, the rising economic power of women undermined patriarchal authority and destabilized marriages

The rise of individualism associated with urbanization and industrialization has meant increasing emphasis on self-fulfillment and growing intolerance of unsuccessful marriages. In essence, the cultural argument suggests that marriages in the past tended to be governed more by social norms and less by rational calculation to maximize individual happiness. Since the nineteenth century, increasingly individualistic values could have simultaneously contributed to rising female market-labor participation and to rising marital instability.”

The key phrase that from the analysis of women working as it relates to marriage stability is this one:

“the rising economic power of women undermined patriarchal authority and destabilized marriages”   

I would go a step further.

The Bible tells us that it is God, not man that instituted patriarchal authority:

“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

I Corinthians 11:3 (KJV)

22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.23 For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing

28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. 29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church”

Ephesians 5:22-24 & 28-29 (KJV)

“4 That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

Titus 2:4-5

The Bible clearly establishes patriarchy – male headship over women.  It establishes the relationship of man to woman in clear and unequivocal terms.  Men are to be the leaders, protectors and providers for women. Women are to be dependent upon their fathers and then ultimately their husbands for leadership, provision and protection in the same way the Church is to depend on Christ for these things.

Western culture, and really the cultures of the entire world used to embrace this basic principle of society.  Only since the mid 19th century with the rise of egalitarianism which spawned feminism did the Western world turn its back on God’s design and we are reaping the natural consequences of that decision.

What if we reversed Sarrah Le Marquand’s advice?

What if instead of making it illegal for stay at home moms to stay home after their children reached school age we made it illegal for married women to enter the workforce at all? I know GASP! That is crazy right.  What if we restored by law the dependence of women upon men and reversed all the so called “progress” of the woman’s rights movement?

The fact is we know from the history of mankind that if we made it more difficult for women to work outside the home or own property husbands would once again have the help meets God designed for them and children would have their mothers back.  Women would once again be able to fully concentrate on their homes rather than dealing with the struggle between work life and home life balance that feminists like Sarrah Le Marquand think is so great but other women know has a horrible effect on their lives and that of their families.

Yes there would be some negatives. Some women would again be trapped in bad marriages or abusive situations.

But we have to ask ourselves this question.  Which was better for society? Was society worse off by having a patriarchal authority or by eliminating patriarchal authority to address injustices against women? I would argue that if the measure of a society is the strength of the family unit and not the size of our homes or bank accounts we have the answer to that question.

I have said it before and I will say it again.  Feminism will come to end one way or the other.  Either governments will abolish feminism before they collapse due to its negative effects on their cultures or those governments will collapse giving rise to new governments that will have the courage to do what must be done.

Are Biblical Gender Roles a “broken system” that God wants torn down?

“Christ didn’t die to make our garbage nicer garbage. He died to overcome it, to take it away. There are many broken and imperfect systems in scripture and throughout the world, and patriarchy is one of them. God isn’t in the process of making broken systems nicer. Christ didn’t die so that we can ultimately have kinder injustices. God is tearing down broken systems.”  This was the opinion expressed by Kelly Ladd Bishop in an article she wrote for the Huffington Post entitled “The Foolishness of So-Called Biblical Gender Roles”.

You might think this was an attack on my blog by the title but it was actually against some other groups that hold to similar (but not identical) beliefs in Biblical Gender Roles.

Bishop made these statements as well:

“Taking an unjust system and making it nicer is foolishness.

However, this is exactly what many evangelical groups are doing with patriarchy.

Patriarchy, at its core, is a system of injustice, where women are not fully autonomous, but are under the authority of men…

Besides the exegetical problems with teaching a gender hierarchy, which are plentiful, the basic idea that God ordains a gender hierarchy is completely counter to God’s character, and the entire message of redemption in scripture.”

“gender hierarchy is completely counter to God’s character”? Really? I think Bishop and I must be reading different Bibles. No the actual problem is that she reads the Bible through her own feminist lenses. What that means whenever she comes across a passage that places men over women it must be a mistake.  It was part of a sinful culture that God just overlooked. God was just going along with the crowd.

The God of the Bible is not a God who tolerates sin. No mam.

God is not silent on the issue of Biblical Gender Roles, he is not implicit but rather he is very explicit on the subject.

“But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God… Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” – I Corinthians 11:3 & 9 (KJV)

“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing…

Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.” – Ephesians 5:22-24 & 33 (KJV)

“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.” – Colossians 3:18 (KJV)

“That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.” – Titus 2:4-5(KJV)

“Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives…

For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands: Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.” – I Peter 3:1 & 5-6 (KJV)

It looks like to me and these other Bible believing groups she attacks that Bishop’s assertion that “gender hierarchy is completely counter to God’s character” does not have a Scriptural leg to stand on.

Gender hierarchy is about God displaying a wonderful symbol of the relationship between God and his people.  In the Old Testament this was pictured in God’s relationship with Israel, and in the New Testament it is pictured in the relationship of Christ to his Church.

Kelly Bishop – you are right that “Christ didn’t die to make our garbage nicer garbage. He died to overcome it, to take it away.” He died to so that you and other Christian feminists could put away the garbage of your selfish ambition and rebellion against his design for your life.

Why Christian Egalitarianism is not Biblical or Christian

EgalitarianWomanShakesFists1

Egalitarians reject the historic and literal reading of the Word of God where it shows distinct roles and purposes for which God made man and woman. Those who embrace the historical Christian view of the roles of men and women are in modern times called Complementarians.

What do Complementarians believe?

Complementarians believe that God designed man and woman to “complement each other”, like two opposites that when they come together form a whole, thus the term “Complementarian”. These are Christians who believe that the traditional gender roles that men and women have had throughout history are not only “traditional”, but also by the design of God as seen in the Scriptures. Complementarians believe that men and women are equal in their souls, their humanity and their worth to God, but this is where their equality ends and their differences begin.

For instance, Complementarians do not believe that men and women have equal responsibility (opportunity or right) to exercise leadership in the home and the church. They believe God gave clear direction that men are to exercise authority over women in the home and in the church, and that women are called to graciously submit to the authority of the men over them, as well as accept the boundaries that God has place them within.

What is the difference between “two part” Complentarians and “full” Complentarians?

Complementarians generally believe in a hierarchal view of marriage, sometimes called Patriarchy (male lead marriage and family). While there are many variations between Complementarians, the biggest difference that Complementarians have amongst themselves is on the role of women outside the home and church. “Two part Complementarians” are those who believe that man’s authority over woman is limited to the Home and the Church. “Full Complementarians” believe that in all three areas of life – in the Home, the Church as well as society in general, women are to be under the authority of men.

An example of this would be, full Complementarians (also called Patriarchalists) would believe it is unbiblical for a woman to be President of the United States, whereas most two part Complementarians would believe it would be ok for a woman to be President.

I am a full Complementarian.

What do Christian Egalitarians believe?

Probably one the best representations of Christian Egalitarianism is found at http://www.cbeinternational.org/content/cbes-mission. Here are few excerpts from their mission statement:

Believers are called to mutual submission, love, and service.

God distributes spiritual gifts without regard to gender, ethnicity, or class.

Believers must develop and exercise their God-given gifts in church, home, and world.

Believers have equal authority and equal responsibility to exercise their gifts without regard to gender, ethnicity, or class and without the limits of culturally-defined roles.

Restricting believers from exercising their gifts—on the basis of their gender, ethnicity, or class—resists the work of the Spirit of God and is unjust.

Believers must promote righteousness and oppose injustice in all its forms.

How do Christian Egalitarians use the Scriptures to support their beliefs?

Christian Egalitarianism starts first and foremost with an idea, that there are no boundaries upon people based upon their gender, and that God did not design specific roles for men and women. In the Egalitarian view, aside from their reproductive differences, men and women are equal in every way and both men and women can fulfill any role in the home, the church or society at large interchangeably. Marriage is partnership of equals, with no earthly head, but only Christ as it’s leader.

It is with these ideals in mind that Christian Egalitarians chose to reinterpret the Scriptures. These are the three primary Biblical sources through which Egalitarians reinterpret all the Bible:

  1. The “help meet” of Genesis chapter 2 is not Adam’s subordinate because the Greek word “Ezer” is usually used of God’s help toward man in the Old Testament and God is not man’s subordinate. In the Egalitarian view, Eve was no more Adam’s helper, than Adam was Eve’s helper, they were in fact equals made for each other. Egalitarians see Adam’s rule over Eve as part of the curse of sin, not the original design of God.
  2. They believe that the phrase “there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” in Galatians 3:28 means that God abolished all gender roles and boundaries for Christian believers. If man ever was the head of woman, this no longer exists in the Christian world.
  3. Whenever the Bible speaks of man being the head of woman (I Corinthians 11:3, Ephesians 5) it does not mean “authority” in their view, but instead means “source”. “Head” in these passages is simply referring to the fact that God created woman from man when he took the rib from Adam’s side.

Egalitarians sacrifice the Scriptural teachings of Biblical inerrancy in their allegiance to their Egalitarian views and they write off whole passages of Scripture as being “scribal additions” where they cannot explain away the phrasing. Some of these passages include Ephesians 5:22, Ephesians 5:24 and I Peter 3:6.

In my next post in this series on Christian Egalitarianism, we will explore the “help meet” of Genesis chapter 2 and differing beliefs between Christian Egalitarians and Complementarians.

What did God mean when he called woman a help meet for man?