One reason that men abuse their wives is because women rebel against their husband’s God-given authority, a Southern Baptist scholar said Sunday in a Texas church.
Bruce Ware, professor of Christian theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., said women desire to have their own way instead of submitting to their husbands because of sin.
From Ethics Daily
HT: Tony Cartledge
And we can’t figure out why our roles are dropping.
Comments on: "Whaaat??" (33)
Debbie,
The reports are coming from the liberal Ethics Daily and ultra-liberal Tony Cartledge. If what they report is true, I am appalled. However, I don’t trust either of these two sources. I’d prefer to read the entire message in context before making a judgment.
Les
Les: Here is the entire sermon which you can listen to here.
HT:Denny Burk
What a silly thing to say – and dangerous. Husbands abuse their wives because they are sick. He seems to be ignorant of what abuse is all about…
Alan: I agree with you. I realize that Bruce Ware also says this is wrong, but it never should have been said. Women are never abused because they are trying to usurp authority. Women are abused because they are married to a man who wants to control, debase, and humiliate them. It’s much like the tactics used on Prisoners of War. If anything, the woman is trying desperately to please the man, and is never good enough according to the man.
He’s certainly not helping his cause any by saying what he said…
Again, I most certainly agree with you Alan. I don’t think it’s men’s authority being challenged that is the cause of abuse. I think just that statement, shows that abuse is not taken as seriously as it should be. And I agree with you in that it’s ignorance. If I sound like I’m riled, I am.
You should be riled… we should always be riled at ignorance in subject matters such as this. No one that I can see (though I haven’t read all 270-something responses) is saying anything about that statement of his (other than me). I wonder why?
Denial and uncomfortableness. It also puts a little nail in the complementary view as it should. I really enjoy listening to John Piper, and I glean a lot from him, but in this topic he and I would disagree. I believe it is this view to the extreme that gives credence to abuse, even though this isn’t the goal. The goal is to try and stay true to scripture, though I think in light of how Christ used women in ministry and Paul, there is no excuse for it. Instead of telling women how they should be, the goal should be to include telling husband how to treat their wives. I didn’t hear that this time.
Egaltarians on the other hand glean healthy, Christ driven women. So you decide. If I were to pick one view, I would lean more to egaltarian simply because they teach treating women with dignity and respect. I also see much of what they say in scripture. I see too much subservience in the complementarian view that just isn’t in scripture. I am neither complementarian nor egalitarian. I am in the middle of both. There is good in both and extremes in both. Some would call that Cafeteria style, I call it taking the Biblical teaching from both and discarding what I do not see in the Bible.
I guess I’m just tired of women being abused in the name of Christianity. It’s time we as Christians took a stand, but then it’s been Christians who have been abusing and debasing women for years. It’s wrong and it’s no different than other religions treat their women. Christianity is supposed to be different, not the same, and Christ’s life and death he elevated women, not lowered them to the role of servant, but as a helper which the Bible says God is our helper, it doesn’t mean He is our servant.
I love the Bible, I love to dig deep into it’s truths. Christ is all important to me, and who I am in Christ is something I have just been learning the last several years. Thankfully my father, who is Independent Baptist, always taught us girls to be who we were, and to stand for what we believe in spite of opposition from men. He said that he sees something special in us, that we shouldn’t be afraid to show. I’m also married to the best man in the whole world, who has helped me to grow in my confidence and talent. He does the same for our three daughter and our son. He teaches them there is nothing they cannot do.
I am solidly in the complementarian (not sure of that spelling) camp. But I see a difference – I don’t see submission as a bad thing – rather a healthy practice when approached correctly and with respect for your spouse. And I always, always remind myself and others that the issue of submission in the Ephesian verses begins with – or rather, the prior section ends with MUTUAL submission – it’s almost as if God is inserting a disclaimer as a warning not to be abusive of the impending discussion of husbands and wives begins (I know that’s not biblical – just an observation).
I remember looking into this controversy for the first time after having been taught that wives MUST submit to their husbands and seeing Ephesians 5:21 for the first time and being astounded that I had not been directed to that verse along with the other verses on roles of husbands and wives. Whenever I discuss this issue with anyone – male or female – that verse never comes up until I bring it up as a point to consider as we discuss roles of husbands as wives. And even then, it doesn’t seem to affect the conversation any. People have usually already taken their stance and are not going to change.
This issue has never been one in my marriage. My wife and I agree on the complementarian view and is very conservative in her theological views (for example, she refused to vote for women deacons in our church). Her and I discuss issues that arise in our household and we usually come to mutual conclusion through agreement with one another or compromise and then I lead out in making it happen. Sometimes she just defers to me. Sometimes she follows me when she doesn’t agree with me. Sometimes I do the same (though I will admit it’s not near as often as she does). But I gotta tell you, she is not a doormat. She will kick my me out on my can (or get someone to do it if she can’t) if I ever raised a hand towards her. When I have used abusive language against her, she puts me in my place, refusing to be spoken to in such a manner. She is strong, courageous woman who is not afraid to be known as a submissive wife, but also hasn’t traded in her God-given personhood for a door mat.
Personally, this issue is a non-issue to me – probably because I don’t have a line to tow or am not trying get control of my wife. But sadly, it is an issue that men have taken advantage of for generations – going back to the beginnings and have used, abused and discarded women using this idea that we are superior to them. Women always get the raw deal and it’s heart-breaking to hear of a Christian being abusive towards his wife. I usually question a man’s standing with Christ when I hear of it. While I can understand that we are all fallen and given to mistakes and even besetting sin, it’s hard for me to accept a man who says he follows Christ, serves in his church, talks the talk, seems to walk the walk and all the while, he’s beating the snot out of his wife. I’m sorry, I am going to question that man’s salvation.
BTW: glad to hear you had solid parents as you were growing up and a husband that teaches your kids the same – my mom did that for me. my dad did not. he was busy running around with a woman who abused her kids and was verbally abusive towards many others – she went so far as to beat my mom up (while my mom was separated and in the process of being divorced from my dad) while he stood by and laughed. he was never abusive towards us or mom, but he had no character or integrity. he was a big, strong man physically, but he was a weakling when it came to character. he was not a good influence…
thank God for my mom.
Alan: I just wanted you to know I have read your comments, and I really like what you have to say, I will respond when I get back to church. One advantage men have over women is, men don’t have to put on makeup in order to get ready for church. It’s very time consuming.
I ought to do a post on this huh? Alan, as I said above, I really like what you have said and you are balanced in your position as I know Les Puryear and many others are. That is the difference and why I can agree to disagree and also why I do not classify myself as either.
If it’s any consolation I also do not have an iron clad end time view either. I just know I am not dispensationalist. And I’m somewhere between partial preterist and amill. But I’m definitely Republican.
To agree to disagree is a concept I have made my peace with in the past few years. Used to be I discarded those who disagreed with me – presuming I was God’s spokesman on whatever the issue was being discussed. Now, outside of Jesus as the only way to God, I can hold my position and appreciate others well-thought-out positions even though I may still disagree. I guess I am softening up as I grow older!
I have become cynical where it pertains to politics. I am still a Republican – but by default only (no other valid place to turn). But I can tell you that conservative Christians practically replaced Jesus on the throne with Bush or anyone Republican that fit their desires the past 8 years or so and we’ll be paying heavily for it in the next 8 years – if not 12 to 16.
Thanks for the discussion – I have enjoyed it.
Alan: Again, I couldn’t agree with you more than in your last comment. I do hope that in the future there are those who are complementarian that quit using women not being submissive enough as to why they are abused. That is just not true and an ignorant comment. Thank you as well for the discussion.
Thanks for your post, Debbie.
Alan, just wanted to let you know that several of us did address Ware’s statement at length in the (now very long) comment thread.
Friends, there is more to it than we think. If you listen closely, Ware is basically teaching, by implication, that not only is an unsubmissive wife in sin (and that triggers abuse), he is teaching that the husband decides what is sin when it comes to his wife. Since Ware believes that ‘unsubmissiveness’ is sin, then who else can decide when she is being ‘unsubmissive’ but the husband?
This is very dangerous stuff.
But worse, he is teaching salvation by works for women. Did you see this one:
Ware: a woman “shall be saved in childbearing,” by teaching that the word translated as “saved” always refers to eternal salvation
It means that a woman will demonstrate that she is in fact a Christian, that she has submitted to God’s ways by affirming and embracing her God-designed identity as–for the most part, generally this is true–as wife and mother, rather than chafing against it, rather than bucking against it, rather than wanting to be a man, wanting to be in a man’s position, wanting to teach and exercise authority over men,” Ware said. “Rather than wanting that, she accepts and embraces who she is as woman, because she knows God and she knows his ways are right and good, so she is marked as a Christian by her submission to God and in that her acceptance of God’s design for her as a woman.”
Lydia, Bonnie: Thank you so much for your comments, and Bonnie, I will be checking out the comments on your site. Now I realize this is one sentence out of the whole sermon, and some would say why would you make a big deal, he didn’t say that.
My answer is: 1. Yes he did, word for word. It’s in the audio. 2. Maybe you have to be a woman for it to be a big deal. I have counseled too many Christian women who are in abusive or potentially abusive relationships to not know that the complementarian view is being used as an excuse for abuse, and for the very reasons Bruce Ware gave. Difference is, it is not the woman’s lack of submission that is causing the abuse. Alan hit it when he said the spouse who abuses is sick. At fault.
Check the statistics of women who are battered either verbally or physically. 3. I would say the same thing for men who are abused, and I believe they are there even if we do not hear about it.
I had heard the verse you gave Lydia on child bearing and salvation before. I don’t buy it as the only way there is salvation is through faith in Jesus Christ alone. No additions. So I just don’t see that this can be the proper interpretation.
Knowledge is power. Women need the knowledge of the Bible, knowledge of what constitutes abuse, in order to be able to escape it.
“I have become cynical where it pertains to politics. I am still a Republican – but by default only (no other valid place to turn). But I can tell you that conservative Christians practically replaced Jesus on the throne with Bush or anyone Republican that fit their desires the past 8 years or so and we’ll be paying heavily for it in the next 8 years – if not 12 to 16.”
Oh my word! This is exactly what I have thought for a few years too! I am so glad to see someone else say it!
I have to say that I do believe a woman can be in sin if she is not submissive towards her husband – and a husband can also be in sin if he is not submissive to his wife. To put this statement into the context I mean it in – to be a leader in anything in Christ’s Kingdom is to be a servant and an example.
And both the husband and wife can point this sin out to each other if necessary. I think we, as husband and wife, being one in Christ, have a responsibility to confront an unwillingness to be submissive – or maybe a better term to use would be “respectful” – on the part of either husband or wife. Anytime a spouse rises up in an attempt to brow-beat down the other for any reason (except maybe to protect yourself or your kids) is sin. Perhaps if there are recurring issues with submissiveness in marriage, there are much deeper issues to deal with in the relationship than whether or not someone is submissive or not. And as far as abusiveness in a marriage, this is not to be tolerated for any reason or for any length of time and I would always counsel the abused to do whatever it takes to get the abuser out of the house. Christ, as some would suggest, would never counsel an abused wife to stay and be abused. I just don’t see it in His character or in ANY of His words.
BTW: I have always been confused by that salvation through childbearing verse – but then again, I have never found it necessary to do any study of it – so I will have to claim ignorance on that until I look to see what the text says and means…
Amen Alan. I think I am closer to your view than I wanted to admit.
Thank you so much for adding a lot of wisdom to this conversation. Keep it coming.
I hate to tell you this, Alan, but what you are describing in comment 19 is exactly what egalitarians teach about marriage.
I think the difference though Lydia is that Egalitarians – at least the ones worried about women’s “rights” – do not believe a woman should submit at all – or at least that is the image they cast. A wife should be able to do whatever she chooses. This is not true for either the husband or the wife. If I had any problem at all with the SBC’s 2000 faith statement, it was that there wasn’t any mention of mutual submission in there. But I don’t disagree with it’s statements of submission in marriage.
My wife and I that the passage that talks of a wife submitting to her husband in Ephesians teaches that the wife should submit to the husband. She is confident enough in my leadership by my demonstrated past behaviors that even if she doesn’t agree with me, she will defer to my leadership because I am the head of the household (or wife as the text says) as Christ prescribes – and she has every time – even when the results were exactly what she tried to convince me of (i.e. she was right, I was wrong). If I were to abuse this responsibility or use it to take advantage of her or to get my way, she would have problems. The reason? At that point, I have crossed into sin and it becomes her responsibility to call me out on that. True submission of a wife to her husband happens in the context of mutual love for one another and for Christ.
I also believe that husbands are ultimately accountable to only Christ – not the wife for his actions. I believe that a wife is accountable to not only her husband, but also Christ and I believe that children are accountable not only to mom and dad, but also to Christ. I see a clear pattern of authority in the Ephesian passages. This may give the husband more power, but certainly doesn’t given him more standing with God – if anything, we have more responsibility to bear.
I doubt my beliefs line up much with the Egalitarian concept – but I would be fine with having some of both in the way I practice my beliefs. Ultimately, when my wife and I discussed these issues, we discussed them in the context of our understanding of what scripture teaches. We didn’t take into consideration (and still don’t) any thing other than what we see scripture teaching. We read absolutely no one else’s opinions or views of scripture regarding this issue. Neither of us have executed our stated beliefs perfectly, but our complementarian views on this issue have served us well overall through the almost 12 years we have been married.
Now if I could just get her to see that tithing doesn’t necessarily have to be just to the church…
“I think the difference though Lydia is that Egalitarians – at least the ones worried about women’s “rights” – do not believe a woman should submit at all – or at least that is the image they cast.”
Actually Alan, I thought the exact same thing for 20 years. Funny how when I started really looking into it, the few who were fringe extreme, where just that…few and fringe. I started seeing that the propaganda worked very well. Call something liberal and feminist and we all stayed away. It goes back to what you mentioned earlier about putting republicanism on the Throne. They also married the femi-nazi culture with egalitarian ‘anything’. Just like the complimentarians…there are variations.
What I have seen, instead is that they focus on mutual submission. NOT elevating women above men at all. Another thing I have noticed is that they focus on scripture much more than comps do. Comps quote other comps at CBMW. The egals are studying scripture deeply. And when I say this, I mean they are deeply studying the Greek and Hebrew. If anything…many are showing that much of what we believed on this issue has been READ INTO scripture…especially in their creation accounts. And then, There are some things that are just not easily understood (Kephale/Head) but to prescribe a whole religion around what we ‘think’ it might mean is just as bad.
The bottom line is that this issue is becoming an idol. This whole issue of authority…whether in marriage or within the body. All around us, we see leaders in Christendom focused on their ‘anointed’ authority. They are not talking about the being the most humble servant but they are trying to convince us that absolute power in the hands of a few is really about servanthood. Yeah, right. They would do well to study Matthew 5 for a change.
Comps quote other comps at CBMW: What is CBMW?
Any issue can become an idol and we are all great at towing others’ line and arguing to the detriment of what is truly important to Christ (that we love one another) – this is why, though we may disagree at times, my wife and I decided to allow God to speak to us on this issue (and any other that we find necessary to confront) through his Word and nothing else. We don’t always get it right and I for one, am always willing to allow dissenting opinions (especially my wife’s) into my life – they keep me honest and humble.
As I study this issue along the path of my walk with Christ, I may change my mind, I may not – but I figure as long as I keep in mind that Christ didn’t create an all-knowing mini-Christ when He saved me, and if I turn out to be wrong on whatever the issue is, I will, at the very least, be humble in my wrongness and I will honestly have not sought to tow my own or anyone else’s line in regards to interpreting what the Bible says.
Some call that the squishy middle ground. I call it wise counsel.
They are not talking about the being the most humble servant but they are trying to convince us that absolute power in the hands of a few is really about servanthood. Yeah, right. They would do well to study Matthew 5 for a change.
Good point Lydia and I agree.
Alan, I really like the balance you have and the attitude. I hope we have many more like you both in the Christian community at large, and the SB.
Alan,
Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. They are considered the ‘go to’ people for teaching on this issue by the SBC. But, many scholars and even amatuer Greek scholars have found serious problems with some of the ‘firm interpretations’.
CBMW has a website and a blog here
I think Alan has articulated my view in his view. It is a choice.
I remember in the 1970′s it was women who stayed at home against women who worked. It was another all out war which churches seem to be more famous for than for their love and tolerance on issues such as this. It was pathetic as those who stayed at home would insult those who worked, insinuating they were bad mothers, and working mothers lashing back. It seems this is still the case and it is wrong.
The one thing that must be
I probably agree with CBMW – but I am not about to tell others what only God can tell them. It’s one thing to advocate for and defend your position, It’s quite another to tell someone else what they ought ot be doing when it comes to these kinds of issues.
I agree. I see this issue always causing an out and out war, which I’m sure grieves God. Men vs. Women in the Church? It should not be.
Yet I also see those on both sides saying the same thing on so many levels, differing on others. I don’t think feminism, at least as the world defines it, has anything to do with egaltarians. It’s more that so many women have been or have seen other women abused by men in the church, and think it’s time for that to stop and a more balanced view(which I believe is some of both views) be brought in its place. I certainly believe the Bible gives a more balanced view than is currently being taught by many churches.
It used to be much more of a man’s world than it is today. Widows, divorcees were automatically relegated to the poverty level, as education was seen as something women did not need. How wrong they were. Of course that is a post for another day.
I do not however, think that any of this should be a male bashing/female bashing, issue. If anything Christ was kind and compassionate to both men and women. Both were treated the same in scripture. The story of Mary and Martha show me that learning theology, deep theology, at the feet of Christ is something worth striving for, more so than any other thing. That too is a post for another day.
You for example Alan, have a very balanced complementarian view. One that I share. There is nothing that you have written that I have not agreed with.
Lydia and Bonnie have also brought great insight here, I hope to hear more from them as well as you Alan.
I had to laugh at the absurdity of the Ware statement. So to carry his familial power logic a step further, children who are abused simply are not properly obeying their parents? Surely this man is not to be taken seriously.
Ask yourself one question: If the plane crashes, who dies more: the pilot or the co-pilot? Aren’t both dead? Who can crash the plane? Can’t either one force a grounding? So since both are needed to fly, should the pilot and co-pilot constantly fight over status? If you’re a passenger, you surely hope that the business in the cockpit isn’t in distress. There’s far more to concern both when it comes to keeping the bird in the air, such as maintaining heading, watching the changing weather and instruments, and accomplishing a safe landing for all involved.
In our own plane, we keep the cockpit door locked. No need to let either busybodies or terrorists sabatage our smoothly working system. Even the well-meaning ones.
Patricia
PJ: And the sad part is that there are so many saying Bruce Ware did not say this, or condone abuse(which I’m sure he wasn’t), or mean it in that context. But yet, it’s on the audio which I have listened to many times just to see if I misjudged. I just don’t think I did. He said it. He left it at that. He just shouldn’t have said it at all. He does not understand how this affects both the one being abused, which psychologically, she is pretty well deplete, and the one being the abuser. They certainly don’t need any more excuses.
I agree with everything you have given in your comment. Good point about abused children. While I do not by intend to blow away the complementarian view, too many think this, even though it is not said, and it is wrong. I wonder how many men would like to have this council or thought of in this way all their lives. I don’t know too many, especially those who like to battle, who would tolerate it. So, for crying out loud, why would some do this to women, for any reason.
Debbie,
I really think too much credence is given to what pastors, teachers and organizations “think,” defining people in strict terms of systems, even to the point of defending or denying such bizarre statements as Ware’s. The Pharisees micromanaged God’s commandments right down to the number of steps one could take from one’s house on a Sabbath, and Jesus warned against their leaven. Conversely, there will always be deferring “sheeple” who follow prominent persons, for good or ill, and for sundry reasons. But in Christ, we can choose to engage our God-given minds, per the Great Commandment and the priesthood of the believer.
Patricia
You are right PJ. But, we should belong to a local church, we should listen to the ministers, teachers, all the while checking what they say against the Bible. Scripture interpreting scripture. It’s how we grow. Although some may not be called to be teachers, I believe that as we mature, every Christian ought to be able to teach the Bible. They should be that knowledgeable. Men and women.
On this particular subject I have a problem. Looking through the Bible there are just too many women who were a part of ministry, and not in a small way. Yet when asked about this, it seems to be explained away.
If any part of scripture seems to conflict with another, it’s the interpretation, not the passage, that is the problem.
Danny Akin and his wife have a two part post on the blog Between the Times, which is very well written, and gives a more balanced view of complementarianism, closer to what Alan was saying. I recommend reading it, just for the balance, even if one would disagree with their view. I especially appreciated part 2.
Part 1, Part 2.