A Passing Thought on the Roles of Christian Women in the Church
Funny, this website was originally designed to tweet “passing thoughts.” Obviously, it’s more like passing books and essays instead. Recently, I have made some friends with those who are active in proclaiming the equality of women in the church. Ok, I will just be honest here, the mere stating of that invokes visions of the second century feminists who ran through the streets of Corinth topless while spearing pigs. And I understand they wore helmets also. However, I have also thought about how delightful it would be for such a group to show up at this year’s T4G conference. I would even be willing to supply pig costumes free of charge to keynote speakers. Of course, under the guise that it is a great way to show our total depravity and worthlessness before God. Farfetched? Well, you ever heard of the “Scream of the Damned”?
I received an email yesterday from one such friend and browsed some of the links that were supplied. Nervously, I might add. Why the curiosity? I will tell you. I am concerned with an issue I have seen in New Calvinism for some time , but there is so much major error in the movement that I have not had time to address it; namely, the gargantuan expectations on men in regard to leading their families. I have watched this for some time and strongly suspect that I know what is behind it. As Yoda would say, “Suspect strongly, I do.”
Sorry, but I have watched this long enough to make a charge: control, it’s a control tactic. The lightbulb switched on when I was watching a how to be a good husband video by Mark Driscoll. Halfway through, I thought, “Geez, when would you have time to study the word of God and teach it to your family?” Then the next thought was, “duh.” According to Cultwatch.com, one of the primary elements of a cult is “time control.” That rings a bell with me. While attending a dinner that I was invited to by concerned parents of a young man who attended a New Calvinist church, one of their primary concerns was, “They always have something going on; everything he is learning is coming from them corporately or from an invited speaker. We have wanted to question him about this church, but there is no time; he is always there!” Exactly.
Then consider the movement’s position on women bloggers and those who show discernment. I have written a few articles on this. I am just really uncomfortable with the whole busy husbands and silent women in the kitchen motif. And as far as the women’s role? The Scriptures are clear, no man sits at the city gates without a Proverbs 31 wife. And husbands with Koolaid drinking wives only appear to be sitting at the city gates—they are really the gates of appeasement and cowardliness.
So, I partook in a flyby of the material. Some initial points were made that caught my attention. I will be back, with my hand on my spiritual wallet, but also with curiosity fueled by disturbing trends that I see concerning the roles of women in the church.
paul
“Pastor” Mark Dever’s “Trademark Cross”
Dear Sir,
Matt Schmucker
Matt Schmucker
525 A Street NE | Washington, DC 20002
_______________________________________________________________
Dear Matt,
I have contemplated [no pun intended] your email and have sorted through many thoughts in regard to it. I have also consulted the coalition. A decision has been made.
My first thought was Peter’s imperative to obey every ordinance of man; and the fact is, T4G has copyrighted an image of our Lord’s gospel and paid good money for it to maximize marketing effect. Since I am not a New Calvinist, I will go ahead and “leap from the imperative to the command” without contemplating the indicative first. I hope that’s ok with you.
Another consideration was the fact that you could sue me because after I gave my life to Christ, I moved beyond the cross and shared it with other people only, and have not preached the gospel to myself every day. And as your friend Michael Horton has said, if we are saved by the gospel, “and move on to something else” we lose sanctification and justification both (Christless Christianity p.62). So, it wouldn’t be like taking another believer to court, right? Or is that to be taken literally? Does that mean the same thing in its “gospel context”?
However, since New Calvinists believe that any sin is fodder for church discipline (like non-attendance x256), and have authority over anyone who says “that Jesus is the Christ,” it occurred to me that Capitol Hill’s elders could bring me up on church discipline for believing a false gospel. Is that why you guys call it “redemptive church discipline”? And with the authority to declare me an unbeliever whether I am or not, well geez, that’s really scary. I bet you guys have a tight ship around there.
Now Matt, is this the first step of church discipline? I’m repenting, but do I have to get elder approval on that? Let me know.
Earnestly contending for the faith once delivered to the saints,
Paul M. Dohse Sr.
________________________________________________________________
Dear Sir, You have presumed much in your email like who my friends are and whether or not I have contemplated a lawsuit. I mentioned none of that and have simply asked you to stop using a design that you did not pay for and is trademark protected. Will you stop using it or not? I think that requires a simple answer, sir. I would appreciate a timely response. Sincerely, Matt Schmucker * * * * *Matt Schmucker** *Vice President, Together for the Gospel 525 A Street NE | Washington, DC 20002 ___________________________________________________________________________ Matt, You can call me "Paul." However, I commend you for respecting the elderly. You misunderstand, I said, "I'm repenting." I wasn't talking about "deep repentance" which would take a long time. Please interpret my email literally. We have changed the "logo." We have "repented." Not "deep repentance," I have no idea what "species of idol" caused me to do what I did. For crying out loud, it took John Piper eight months to find his. I have honored your request, but on the other hand, since I didn't do it the way David Powlison teaches, this change of heart may not be "real and lasting change." Maybe you could have him email me to give some advice on "reorienting the desires of my heart" [Matt, if you read this here, have him suggest which "X-Ray" questions I should ask myself as well]. Geez Matt, cut me a break, I'm tryin' to do the work here! I'm trying to "get used to my sanctification." paul
Where’s Johnny? My Theory
The following was posted on the Puritan Board by “Damon” and has been previously echoed by the Wartburg Watch blog:
“I just noticed today that J. Mac is not going to be at T4G next year! What gives? Could it be related to the Rick Warren/John Piper issue?”
Bless your heart Damon, but no, MacArthur wouldn’t pass on an opportunity to hang out with Piper for anything. My theory is the following: MacArthur is being punished for writing the book, “Slave.”
The book explores how the word “slave” has been mistranslated over the years to give more of an idea of employee rather than bond slave. In the book, MacArthur departs from his past method of teaching; ie., presenting the information, and then applying it to our walk (practical application). The book is primarily, if not totally what, and not what now? Like the good New Calvinist that he is, MacArthur supplied an excellent, what all of that looks like, with virtually no life application. He also quotes several of his New Calvinist buddies, including NCT hack Douglas Moo, and John Piper more than once.
I haven’t done the math, but if somebody wants to, you might do a invites prior to Slave verses invites after Slave. Even though Mac didn’t break the rules in Slave, the very name of the book implies a robust role for Christians in sanctification, and the New Calvinist crowd will not tolerate that. Just a side note: Piper’s objection to Lordship-like terminology is well documented.
Just my theory.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
leave a comment