Responding to Mike Winger's "Women in Ministry" Series
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 окт 2024
- Should women preach and teach? Have you heard the Egalitarian side? Nothing against Mike personally, but if you watched the Mike Winger series you probably did not hear a strong argument for the egalitarian side. I was comp all my life until recently studying the Bible and the Greek and Hebrew for myself. Mike used a lot of bizzare egal resources and some unusual arguments I havent heard. There are better books and resources out there to refer to to get a more accurate view of what most Christian egalitarian's believe. There are certainly a lot of ways to arrive at a belief, and some arguments are better than others. Complementarianism is very new. It really become a teaching as a reaction to women gaining traction in getting equal rights. There were egalitarians before complementarianism was even a thing. Complementarianism was created to combat egalitarianism. Of course there were aspects of complementarianism that were around before complementarianism but its simply untrue that it was as a core theology in the way it is today. It came about because of a change in our culture and there were men in the church that wanted to suppress that in the church. Did complementarianism really come about to protect Christian TRUTH or was it more about men protecting tradition and their power? Its a question one needs to really consider.
#shortsfeed #shortsvideo #christianmessages #churchfathers #theology #churchabuse #understandingthebible #johnmacarthur #theology #scripture #scriptureexplained #complementarian #egalitarian #falseteaching #faith #jesus #jesuslovesyou #freedominchrist #freedomfromabuse #freedomfrompatriarchy #spiritualabuse #spiritualgrowth #spiritualhealing #spirituality #biblestudy #biblemessage #patriarchy #womanpower #womenpreacher #womenempowerment #women #femaleempowerment #femalepreachers #womanpastor #johnpiper
For a thorough response to Mike and my egalitarian arguments see my video series:
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
What are your top three resources with the best biblical arguments?
Love your videos Mike!
Hi Mike! Thank you for your question! I have taken some time to do some research on this before responding. For you personally I would recommend 2 resources along with a longer video I just posted in response to your series:
How God Sees Women by Terran Williams
terranwilliams.com/
The first video of my Egalitarian response to your series:
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
A video by video, point by point, Egalitarian response to your video series by author Terran Williams:
terranwilliams.com/articles/
Though you invite critique, I have been told by Terran that you have not had the time to read Terran's detailed online article. I would highly recommend his arguments, especially on Genesis (in the article) as those are quite compelling.
@@DivineDissidentit seems like Terran Williams is your go to on this. He tends to present many of the same arguments I talk about in my video series. Your short implies I avoided the best arguments and selected to worst. Terran seems to agree with many of the arguments I addressed. This would mean that I haven’t done what you claimed.
@@MikeWinger This does not reflect what I said. What I said was that these are the specific resources I recommend for you personally. My short points out that you dont represent Christian egalitarian beliefs accurately and that if people want to learn about what egalitarians believe there are better resources than your videos. While some of the books you referenced are good, its clear that you did not understand some of the arguments and misrepresented them and their views, making them appear ridiculous. Terran Williams has dedicated a lot of time to write articles in response to each one of your videos breaking down how you have misrepresented egalitarian authors and their arguments and where there are errors. He did not write these because he agrees with you, he writes these to correct your misunderstandings of the egalitarian view. Sadly, though you ask publicly for people to reach out if you are wrong on something, it seems you are unwilling to read those responses, even from well respected authors. If youve seriously walked away thinking Terran agrees with what you presented, thats concerning and illustrates how you are misrepresenting authors writings and views. Anyone can look up the resources I provided and see what you are claiming is simply not the case. You may honestly believe that you represented our views accurately, but to those who hold the views its not hard to see the errors. It's clear to me and all the egalitarians I know that you don't understand egalitarianism, and if you don't understand it, its going to be hard to present it in a way that other people will understand. Instead of understanding it they will walk away misunderstanding it too.
I've never found a better resource than "Men and Women in Christ" by Andrew Bartlett. He is not fully in either camp and criticizes both sides with no axe to grind. And he came to the opposite conclusions he expected. He's a professional arbitrator and church elder. Highly recommend! The book has been praised by both complementarians and egalitarians.
It wasn't necessary for complimentarianism to be central until it became necessary to refute radical feminism. It was just understood and practiced before then.
Exactly, well said
"More biblical arguments"
Gives none.
Check out my youtube channel! I have lots of long form content where I do put forth my arguments. I even have a video series in response to Winger thats ongoing.
@timothyholley8829 she quoted Wikipedia though 🤣🤣
@@standingonthepromises285 yes I did, there is nothing wrong with using wikipedia for very basic information, such as a date. I do recommend using other sources to back up what is on Wikipedia because not everything is accurate. Wikipedia is not where I initially got my information about complementarianism being new, the reason I referenced Wikipedia is because its something virtually anyone can use to quickly look up information. Making fun because someone uses Wikipedia is like making of someone who googles for info, which we all do. Its fine to use google and Wikipedia to search for information, but only as a starting point. I suggest common sources people are familiar with that everyone can access. If I say a certain book or reference people dont have in front of them they cannot verify it. But they are able to verify something online with ease so they know Im not just making stuff up. And then hopefully that will prompt deeper research. Shorts are meant to invite people to look deeper and start with something simple. I never said that people should rely solely on wikipedia. Even with its problems it is still a source that has value, especially for very basic information. And I think most people who are making fun are being hypercritical like they dont use basic online tools such as wikipedia, google, or other search engines to look for very basic information. Should you trust everything you find? No, but its a starting point. If your only criticism is “oh my gosh she cited Wikipedia” thats petty. Rather than actually seeing if the information is true. That’s the question. Is what I said true or not? Do your own research.
@@DivineDissidentI get what you're saying, but you should have made it clear that your citation of Wikipedia was simply for the layman. from an academic standpoint, citing Wikipedia as a source is laughable, many will not take your points seriously. Secondly, in most cases don't start your argument off with "As an Egalitarian." it makes it seem like you're starting with your view point, and trying to use the bible to support it. Start with the evidence and then run to the conclusion the scriptures point to.
@@cisuminocisumino3250 I appreciate the comment but this video is an opinion its not an argument, if you want to view my videos with my arguments its linked below. The whole purpose of this video is to let people know Mike doesnt represent our views so of course Im going to say this as someone who holds the view. Also its a short, Im not going explain why I cite wikipedia. Then the whole video would be about that which is not the point. Wikipedia is perfectly fine for certain things, this video is not an academic argument or paper. Honestly I think people are being ridiculous on this one point. People laughing at me for using wikipedia as if they dont. As if they dont google for information for dates or basic info. Its the same if I said, hey google when comp was created and youll be surprised to see how new it is. If we are being honest with ourselves we do this all the time for basic stuff like dates. Would that be your course for a paper? no, but its a place for people to start and sure they should verify what they find, but really this is just silly. I wont do it again in my next videos because clearly people are just looking for anything to point at.
If you are interested in the arguments they are below...
A former Complementarian turned Egalitarian responding to Mike Winger's Women in Ministry Series
ruclips.net/p/PL0_rYtMd528LgEX0lOibIUt0i4unPqkRc
Mike is about as unbiased as human beings come. Obviously EVERYONE is biased to a degree, but he makes a genuine effort not to be. You on the other hand...dont seem to be trying very hard.
Regardless of being well meaning, Mike is incredibly off in how he describes egalitarian views. Its not hard for us egalitarians to see that. Congratulations though for knowing so much about me after a 60 second short… as if that is all that exists on my youtube channel. I have a whole series in the making in response to Mike on my youtube channel.
@@DivineDissident I'm sure you do and I'm sure I won't watch it. The sheer haughtiness in this clip tells me all I need to know. I'm more than happy to watch egalitarian videos on the subject from people with humility and thoughtfulness though.
@@ryanbrown4053 haughtiness? No. Frustration. Yes. If you think you know someone from a 60 sec clip thats pretty presumptuous.
@@DivineDissident our impression of you from this 60 seconds is further confirmed by your comments to your viewers who bothered to leave you constructive criticism. It tells us you're not here to build a community to study the Word. I pray the scales are removed from your eyes.
@@vviswana I would encourage you to watch my full series and see for yourself who I am. Judging someone off a 60 second short might not be the best way to go about it. I am about people actually studying the Bible for themselves, rather than regurgitating the comp doctrine the great majority of us have been beaten over the head with for most of our lives if we have been involved in Christian culture at any length. The reality for most Christians is that they have been indoctrinated in many ways by pastors and teachers, they have been taught sets of rules and doctrines. This is just part of that culture. But not a lot of people sit down and really examine what they have been taught and study the WHOLE Bible in depth to see if it adds up. Few people sit down and examine why they believe what they believe. Sadly, so many are comfortable being given a list of “rules” and they take comfort in that, rather than having a deep understanding of WHY they believe what they believe. I am about people OWNING their beliefs because they have truly done the work to make them THEIR beliefs, as opposed to just believing someone who told them something was true. I am also about exposing those who deceive people for their own personal gain which I do believe the creators of complementarianism are guilty of when you actually dig into the history. I talk about all these things on my channel. This short was one of the first ones I have made, not my best, but I still believe what I said.
I love how when Mike Winger spends hundreds of hours studying the bible, researching scholarly insight to the text, considering as many of the arguments on either side as he was able and then spending dozens of hours presenting not only his findings but the arguments and his process… you respond by quoting Wikipedia with an extra helping of sarcasm.
I have a series in response to Mike. Its comical that people think my entire channel is this one youtube short 🤣
Thank you!! This just causes strife between the sexes...The Bible NEVER says that Men are better than women..Our roles are just different, one IS NEVER better than the other... She's trying to start "Mess" that's all.
She’s trying to add hostility for the sake of views for her channel. Otherwise she’d give a quick summary of her arguments or even one example.. instead she claims “bias” which in itself is irrelevant to logical debate.
@@timm439 again I have a whole series in response to mike. Its just laughable for people to see a short and think its my arguments, thats silly, come on now
@@DivineDissidentyou've made up an argument, just to drive traffic to your channel. I'll pass, thanks, and stick to watching Mike's videos.
You'd be more persuasive if you left the condescension out of your responses
this may be more to your liking. What you mistake as condescension is actually frustration, but I get it because it can come off that way
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
@@DivineDissidentfrom one woman to another, it's condescending. Take a step back. It's ok to not realize you came across the wrong way. But take responsibility for it. You were sarcastic and condescending and Jesus loves the humble. Look at the way Mike presents himself
@@lyricscott5134maybe thats how it comes across to you. Was I condescending? I'm not speaking from a place of superiority but as an equal, and as someone who knows what egalitarians believe. I know thats really hard for some women to grasp in the culture where women are expected to be mousy. If you want a good example of bad behavior I would look at Mike Winger, who thought it was a great idea at the end of his series to say "complementarians win", "egalitarians lose" and then tells egalitarians to repent. I have every right to be angry with someone who twists and misrepresents what I and others believe. I'm not here to be a people pleaser. I think what a lot of people want is the appearance of humility. Jesus was humble and he tossed tables, and called out the Pharisees. While this video doesn't really represent how I normally speak, I don't see it as a big deal. The big deal I would argue are those who are trying to silence women whether they do it "nicely" or not. People can get so caught up on the little things (such as my tone) and miss the mountain in front of them (true oppression in the name of God).
If you want people to take you seriously, you need to check your attitude. I clicked on this because i like to see different perspectives. If you disagree with Mike, then give factual, nonjudgmental reasons for why you disagree. Your snarky approach and minutes of Wikipedia research is not likely to change anyone's mind, especially when compared to his professional approach and hours of real research.
Its really Interesting to me how your response comes off with the same "attitude" you are accusing me of, and it seems to only be based off one 60 second short. You haven't seen my full series in response to Mike, you are judging me off one 60 second clip. Compare that to me, someone who is egalitarian, watched most of Mike's 40 hours of "research" and has every right to express frustration with his misrepresentation of egalitarian views. I understand that it may come off a certain way, and it wasnt the way I intended because it doesnt really express what I was actually feeling....what is actually being expressed is frustration with Mike misleading people in what we believe. And just like you can leave a comment sharing your thoughts or what appears to be shredding my short, I have every right to make videos and content expressing my thoughts and views, and sometimes when you do that people misunderstand you. I think if you watch more of my content youll see that your first impression of me isnt accurate.
I have a full series in response to Mike where I go into more detail with my own arguments as an egalitarian if you want to see another view:
ruclips.net/p/PL0_rYtMd528LgEX0lOibIUt0i4unPqkRc&si=NPmmamWfS4-G1f4j
@@DivineDissident*takes no responsibility for what she did incorrectly* if you’re going to correct someone and then all your comments are correcting how you addressed the issue, maybe you need to reevaluate how you presented your position.
@@CodykelzI think her ego is getting in the way.
It hurts internally there.
"Much, much better resources with much better biblical arguments" sounds more like "my verse is better than yours" as supposed to "lets discuss this"😅
@@patriotpearl264 when you have ears that don't hear and eyes that can not see....
I can’t even take this seriously…
Really? Why is that?
@@DivineDissidentyour high pitched voice your facial contortions your sarcasm and dripping tongue of lies to name a few
ruclips.net/video/NMXvj5EspZo/видео.htmlsi=VG_P5YNPzpgx61IK
@@DivineDissident Your attitude
Thank you for posting this. This young lady needs to know that Godly women oppose her nonsense.
By "much better" and "more biblical" you mean "I like them better"
Or maybe it’s what you like better. Of course many men are going to like it better for women to be their servants, their baby makers, their maids, their cooks, their little helper who revolves around them. Weak men who want subservient women are going to be against women being liberated and set free from such bondage. Keeping women under men only benefits men. And who has decided for the last 2000 years how to interpret the Bible? Men. Time for both men AND women’s voices to be heard and for women to finally be able to exercise all their gifts for the benefit of the whole church and to experience marriages of real partnership rather than servitude to men. Submission is mutual. And church leadership needs both men and women. Why? Because men and women are complementary, therefore both desperately needed in all levels of ministry. Complementarians don’t even believe in really complementarity, if they did it wouldn’t be a theology of exclusion and restriction only for women. Women are the only ones being excluded from using their gifts. They are called equal in word but not treated as such in deed. Women’s gifts are not valued as men’s are. This flies in the face of everything Paul teaches about how to do church in 1 cor 11-14
@@DivineDissident you just sound really bitter to be honest and I think that bitterness clouds the lens through which you study God's Word. I'm sorry that you've been treated so poorly by some (hopefully not all) of the men in your life and given such deep wounds. We will lift you up in prayer.
@@DivineDissidentyou are putting Jesus in the back seat and putting your wounds first. None of the 12 apostles where women. The Lord's church didn't get 2000 years of Jesus' teachings wrong either. Please ask for the Lord to do a work in your heart.
@@justdoinmything No, thats a low blow to attack someone you dont agree with. Yes the church got it wrong for 2000 years which is why complementarianism exists!! It replaced the view held for almost 2000 years.
People often dont know the history which is a big part of the problem. Complementarianism was not coined to name the traditional view. But a brand new one. Complementarianism is NOT the historical view of the church that was held for almost 2000 years. The view that was held up until around the 1960s was that men were superior and women were inferior. They were not equal in personhood. I have a whole video on this that looks at the church fathers and reformers and how they viewed women. Women were "intellectually inferior" and thats why they were deemed incapable of leadership. The men did the superior tasks and the women were to do the inferior. It was even questioned whether or not women were even made in the image of God. Saying that comp was meant to describe the view since the early church is simply not true. The historical view held for most of the history of the church was largely rejected by most. Upon its rejection egalitarianism was becoming popular and they were the first ones to describe their view of men and women as complimentary. This is when those who held the traditional view had to come up with a new view because people werent accepting it anymore, because reality showed it was wrong. Women were not intellectually inferior, or inferior persons. People have been wrong on this for most of history, so comp and egal should both be looked at views emerging around the same time that the historical view was rejected and shown to be false. Complementarianism may have a similar outcome in restricting women but its arguments are different. It has similarities to the traditional view but is not the same. The traditional view was unapologetically and openly misogynistic. Complementarianism hides its real intent (maintaining the hierarchy of men over women) while using nice sounding language like "equal with different roles". Equal in person plus not equal in authority= not equal.
People are always getting things wrong, anyone who studies history can see the pattern of that over and over and over. Just like the Israelites, just like the Pharisees, in many ways so has the church strayed again and again and again. It didnt even take more than a decade for Paul to have to return to or send someone, like Timothy to churches he planted to deal with false teaching and heresies. He warned them thats what would happen, and thats what did. If it could happen in a decade imagine 2000 years. People need to study history more.
@@DivineDissidentIt really disheartens me to see women like you rebelling against the word of God in your delusion. Apostle Paul in his letters to Timothy and Corinthians unequivocally discouraged women to teach or assume authority over men. Now if you consider it partiality then you are accountable to God.
I’ll be sure to check better sources than Mike Winger, such as Wikipedia and feminist blogs
haha, so funny. Wikipedia is not a reliable source for academic research, however for basic reference material, especially to verify the DATE of a historical event, its okay. I referenced the date because its an easy way for ANYONE to look up for themselves and verify a basic date. And thats a good STARTING PLACE for people just to see, oh okay she is telling the truth here, complementarianism hasnt been around that long. Thats the point. The word "feminist" is really used by compers to be a basic insult of anyone who disagrees with them. Most of the theologians with blogs that I often reference are fluent in Greek and Hebrew and have been studying the bible on this topic for decades, unlike Mike Winger who gave it a few months of study before making videos. So yes, there are much better sources, Mike hasnt really got a grasp on egal theology to explain it to others. He has his view as a complementarian basically getting his feet wet by reading a few egal books. I could see from his series he accepted many comp ideas as correct without evaluating them and then using them to disregard the other side. But Im not here to just make this short to say so, Im in process of making a series thats going to examine a lot of these things.
@DivineDissident I am glad you found it funny. You are right, complementarianism hasn’t been around all that long, only since the 1st century and prior. I apologise for the bad word I used when I said ‘feminist’. I just meant people who have a grudge against men, in this context I meant having a grudge against men for interpreting the Bible the way they did, and believing they only interpreted it that way to oppress women. But I am glad you don’t have a grudge against anybody. All the best.
@@Apologetics1Peter315 I dont think you included enough sarcasm in your comment.
@@DivineDissidentwhy do you think men inherently want to control women just because of their genitals?
Genesis 3:16 ESV
[16] To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you.”
Ephesians 5:22-23 ESV
[22] Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. [23] For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.
1 Peter 3:7 ESV
[7] Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.
1 Timothy 2:13-15 ESV
[13] For Adam was formed first, then Eve; [14] and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. [15] Yet she will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
1 Corinthians 11:3 ESV
[3] But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.
1 Corinthians 11:8-10 ESV
[8] For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. [9] Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. [10] That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
Titus 2:3-5 ESV
[3] Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, [4] and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, [5] to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled.
Colossians 3:18-19 ESV
[18] Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. [19] Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them.
2 Peter 3:15-17 ESV
[15] And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, [16] as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. [17] You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.
Wow... That body language speaks louder than the condescending delivery of your poor semantic arguments. I dont even agree with mike on a handful of topics, but I'll keep subbing because he shows respect for each side and does his best to present them and does not attack those who hold views he disagrees with.
You are drawing too many conclusions from a 60 second short. Pretty much any egalitarian with any respect for the Bible knows what Mike presented is not egalitarianism. If your views were so distorted and inaccurately presented you’d probably be frustrated too.
Scary when someone quotes Wikipedia as their resource 😂
scary when people act like they dont use wikipedia and google to search basic information. Wikipedia is fine as a very basic resource. Is it for academic research? no. But its perfectly fine for the every day person to seek basic information such as a date of something. Yall act like the inet is not a tool everyone uses every single day to search basic stuff. I dont recommend people end their research there, as whats on wiki and google is not always accurate, but there is nothing wrong with it as a starting point
Been saying that...when I was in College you would get laughed out of the classroom if you cite Wikipedia as a source.... Now, my youngest son is in College and they NOW accept Wikipedia as a LEGITIMATE source...I really thought that he (son) was joking....He was not. This is the disconnect.. The younger generation THINKS that THEY are SOOO smart without even realizing that the Opposite is TRUE.
Ya'll were scaring me for a second... wiki and Google are my go-to's
@@DivineDissident The problem isn't quoting Wikipedia. The problem seems to be that you think these ideas started in the 70s/80s because that's when the complementarian label kicked up. Not seeming to recognize that the movement was an attempt to label a position that has been held by central church fathers and institutions throughout the ages.
@@neonmarbles Im constantly amazed how few people know the history on this.
Your comment doesnt really reflect the facts of history. Complementarianism was not coined to name the traditional view. But a brand new one. Complementarianism is NOT the historical view of the church that was held for almost 2000 years. The view that was held up until around the 1960s was that men were superior and women were inferior. They were not equal in personhood. I have a whole video on this that looks at the church fathers and reformers and how they viewed women. Women were "intellectually inferior" and thats why they were deemed incapable of leadership. The men did the superior tasks and the women were to do the inferior. It was even questioned whether or not women were even made in the image of God. Saying that comp was meant to describe the view since the early church is simply FALSE. The historical view held for most of the history of the church was largely rejected by most. Upon its rejection egalitarianism was becoming popular and they were the first ones to describe their view of men and women as complimentary. This is when those who held the traditional view had to come up with a new view because people werent accepting it anymore, because reality showed it was wrong. Women were not intellectually inferior, or inferior persons. People have been wrong on this for most of history, so comp and egal should both be looked at views emerging around the same time that the historical view was rejected and shown to be false. Complementarianism may have a similar outcome in restricting women but its arguments are very different. It has similarities to the traditional view but is not the same. The traditional view was unapologetically and openly misogynistic. Complementarianism hides its real intent (maintaining the hierarchy of men over women) while using nice sounding language like "equal with different roles". Equal in person plus not equal in authority= not equal. Complementarianism is not about equality its about hierarchy. They framed it as equality to appease those who were calling for equality. Those who "coined" complementarianism took the word that egalitiarians used to described themselves (complementary) which caused a great deal of confusion over what the view was. It was a classic political kind of move to choose the right words even if those words didnt really reflect truth. Then the council on biblical manhood and womanhood was created to propogate this new theology EVERYWHERE, and wow did they succeed in creating a pervasive system of indoctrination. Churches were in crisis over what to do and happily embraced this "solution" so they could have an answer on what to teach their congregations.
59 seconds vs 11 hours... I wonder who is trying to gracefully show both sides and who put in the homework.
I have a series on my channel, I dont just post shorts
Mic drop. 🎤
That’s exactly what I was thinking 😂
1 Timothy 2:11-12: “11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.”
Genesis 3:16 ESV
[16] To the woman he said, “I will surely multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children. Your desire shall be contrary to your husband, but he shall rule over you.”
Ephesians 5:22-23 ESV
[22] Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. [23] For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior.
1 Peter 3:7 ESV
[7] Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.
1 Timothy 2:13-15 ESV
[13] For Adam was formed first, then Eve; [14] and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. [15] Yet she will be saved through childbearing-if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
1 Corinthians 11:3 ESV
[3] But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God.
1 Corinthians 11:8-10 ESV
[8] For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. [9] Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. [10] That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
Titus 2:3-5 ESV
[3] Older women likewise are to be reverent in behavior, not slanderers or slaves to much wine. They are to teach what is good, [4] and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, [5] to be self-controlled, pure, working at home, kind, and submissive to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be reviled.
Colossians 3:18-19 ESV
[18] Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. [19] Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them.
2 Peter 3:15-17 ESV
[15] And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, [16] as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures. [17] You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, take care that you are not carried away with the error of lawless people and lose your own stability.
Quoting Wikipedia to rebutt a scholar... really good point.
rofl you are missing the point, I referenced wikipedia because its something the common person can understand. Not everyone is a scholar, but most people can look up basic information on wikipedia. I dont recommend it for theological study and I know not all the information there is accurate. But you can easily verify that complementarianism as we know it began with the danvers statement which was published in 1988. You can find that on the council of biblical manhood and womanhood website.
If you want something more specific, actual rebuttal of some of the specific things Mike said then this is more for you:
ruclips.net/video/_f7EidKk374/видео.html
To be fair, Mike Winger isn't really a scholar. He's just a really intelligent, well-read guy who studies scholars and actually goes out of his way to fairly present their work.
Lots of arrogance and condescension here. I don’t lean one way or the other wholeheartedly, but I can definitely say Mike Winger is definitely more well versed in this discussion than you are. Your only sources of information as a critique are modern sourcing. If you want to have any standing here, go to the Bible, and read the first and second century church father’s materials to understand the earliest biblical interpretations and what the original authors would have taught and understood.
If you think you’re right and Mike is wrong and you can prove it, challenge him to a debate. I guarantee it would go exactly as expected.
Thanks for your comment. I can see how it might come off that way but thats not really the intention here. You’ve watched a 60 second short and have judged two people. If you are going to judge with all the information youd have to see my full series first and compare it to Mike’s. You are also wrong that my only information is modern sourcing, again I have a whole video playlist/podcast dedicated to this. Im going to be posting more videos in my series shortly digging into all the primary scriptures comp uses, as well as responding to some of Mike’s points. Ill be starting with posting a video very shortly covering 1 timothy 2:12 which Mike never actually covered, one of the main verses used to support the entire theology. Anyone who really wants to learn another view can watch my series. Im actually planning on doing something like a debate (not with Mike because hes too large of a channel in comparison with mine at the moment) with another complementarian to show each argument side by side. I might sound arrogant, but really its frustration with someone reading a few books and then presenting egalitarianism without understanding it. Then people walk away thinking they understand it, when in reality they’ve only heard part of it. Granted Im glad some people might walk away with a softer form of complementarianism, but they still arent really grasping what many egalitarians believe and why. Mike spent nearly 7 hours talking about head coverings, and didn’t take any time to dig into HUGE scriptures like 1 timothy 2:12. I think maybe he didnt want to open that can of worms, because it truly does cast a lot of doubt onto comp theology. He said he was saving it until the end and then never touched it. Studying the Greek and context of 1 timothy 2:12 was actually the first step for me in seeing that the basis for comp theology was a lot weaker than it seems. Leaving out some of the CORE egalitarian arguments and then presenting some of the weaker less central arguments and then kind of making fun of the other view (while misrepresenting it, whether intentionally or unintentionally) leaves people with skewed ideas. And its not like I havent reached out to Mike Winger multiple times, I have. He said he really wanted to be an egalitarian but then when Terran Williams, a published author wrote a point by point response to each one of Mikes videos to show him how he misrepresented egalitarian views Mike said he didnt have time to read it. Ive read the entire thing on Terrans Website as well as his book How God Sees Women. He also used to be a complementarian. Mike says a lot of stuff in his videos but that doesnt mean they are 100% truthful. Some people just say things. Like “If Im wrong on this reach out to me.” I have and tons of people in the egal community have, as well as Terran. He has shown that he actually really doesnt want feedback. These are not the actions of a person who really wants to understand the egal side, or wanted to truly be egal. A person’s actions say a lot more than their words. Its these kinds of things that have to do with why my short is the way it is. There is more context behind what is seen here. And yes I could re-record this short to be more factual on it and have a little less attitude, because people are so quick to judge. But this short is what it is and maybe in the future Ill record another one. Just because you may not like how I said what I said, doesnt mean Im wrong. Anyone who might respond to a wrongdoing with frustration might be the person people point their finger at, just because of their reaction. Its one thing to judge a reaction if you dont understand the cause. In understanding the cause, the reaction then is understood or seen as more fitting.
Also just so you know, Mike saying he wasnt going to read Terrans point by point response to what Mike presented and how it differs from what egalitarians believe…. That is information I heard directly from Terran, its not second hand information. I wanted to have Terran on my channel to talk about some of these points, and I did ask him, but again Im a small youtuber and he is busy with a lot of engagements. You can take a read Terrans response to Mike here:
terranwilliams.com/what-winger-presently-gets-wrong-egalitarian-silver-bullet-galatians-328/
Mike did not make a video series about what egalitarians believe. He made a video series about what he thinks egalitarians believe. His “silver bullet” video for example, I dont know any egalitarians who regard that verse as a silver bullet for women preachers. Most of the ones I know would say that to use that verse in such a manner would be out of context.
To be honest, someone who deals with pride shouldn’t be making videos like this.
ruclips.net/video/zvCg3fq9ja0/видео.html
This video is *PROOF* that there are no solid, Biblical arguments for egalitarianism. It’s all based on perception and feelings. Not one of my egalitarian mentors could ever give me a solid argument in favor of this ideology when I was being discipled, and I remain completely unconvinced.
Proof? This video is not an egalitarian argument. It’s a statement saying Mike didn’t present egalitarian beliefs accurately. The proof of that is in my ongoing series featured on my youtube channel.
@@DivineDissident … but you *are* egalitarian, correct?
@@TVHouseHistorian
To say Jesus was ok with a woman being a Judge over Israel in the Old Covenant, but Jesus would be strongly opposed to a woman being an elder in a small church in the New, makes no sense. This is all Paul. Paul had a number of false, contradictory and confusing teachings. He was very much a man of his time and his pride.
I've looked at several of Paul's teachings, should you want a study. He doesn't come out well.
@@8784-l3b So you’re saying the Bible is fundamentally fallible. Tells me all I need to know about the secular feminist - er, uh, I mean “egalitarian” position, and why egalitarian churches *always* have the propensity to slide Leftward. Besides, you’re talking about an OT *JUDGE,* (totally different role, completely different context) not a Pastor. Can women be leaders? Yes. But the Pastor role is reserved exclusively for men. Complementarianism has nothing to do with women being inferior or anything like that.
@@TVHouseHistorian Paul describes himself as a perfect Christian.
Was he? This and other things are covered in that essay. Table of
contents is below:
TABLE OF CONTENTS OF:
PAUL
HIS FALSE, CONTRADICTORY, AND CONFUSING TEACHINGS
INTRODUCTION
Part 1 PAUL'S CONVERSION STORY
Part 2 PAUL INSTRUCTS/ORDERS TIMOTHY TO BE CIRCUMCISED
Part 3 PAUL CONTRADICTS HIS OWN TEACHING ON TONGUES AND PROPHECY
Part 4 PAUL STATES IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO EAT FOOD SACRIFICED TO IDOLS
AS LONG AS NO ONE SEES YOU DOING SO
Part 5 PAUL SEEMS TO ALTER HIS BELIEFS AND WHATEVER ELSE IS
NECESSARY FOR THE "SAKE OF THE GOSPEL".
Part 6 PAUL TEACHES THAT A HUSBAND RULES OVER HIS WIFE
Part 7 PAUL'S SUPPORT FOR MARRIAGE IS WEAK
Part 8 PAUL WRITES OF HEARING DIVISIONS WITHIN THE CHURCH
AND HOW THIS WAS NOT PROPER AND SHOULD STOP
YET STATES THAT CHRISTAINS SHOULD FOLLOW PAUL
Part 9 PAUL WAS OK WITH THE UNSAVED PREACHING THE GOSPEL
Part 10 PAUL REFERS TO HIMSELF AS A SPIRITUAL FATHER
THE MOST SERIOUS FALSE TEACHING OF PAUL
Part 11 PAUL STATES THAT WOMEN SHOULD BE SILENT
Part 12 PAUL IS OPPOSED TO WOMEN BEING ELDERS.
THEREFORE HE IS OPPOSED TO WOMEN BEING
SHEPHERDS/PASTORS.
PART 13 PAUL'S FALSE BELIEF THAT THE RETURN OF JESUS WOULD TAKE
PLACE WITHIN A HUMAN LIFETIME RESULTS IN HIM TEACHING
AGAINST MARITAL SEX AND NORMAL EMOTIONS
PART 14 PAUL STATES THAT HE IS A PERFECT CHRISTIAN
CONCLUSION AND FINAL THOUGHTS
There is no biblical basis for egalitarianism.
Deborah. Men and women are perfectly equal spiritually. She was a pastor, according to the scriptures. This is how the Judges are described in Chronicles, by God.
In all places where I have walked with all Israel, have I spoken a word with any of the judges of Israel, whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying, ‘Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?’
-excerpt 1 Chronicles 17 verse 6 NASB translation
A woman could only be given the authority by God to execute a man for his sin, if women are spiritually equal to men. A Judge could judge homicide cases according to Deuteronomy. Therefore Deborah, as a Judge, could execute a man for his sin. A Judge's verdict could not be altered or appealed.
A Judge was REQUIRED in scripture to judge only the hardest of cases.
Refusal to accept a Judge's verdict on any matter,
resulted in execution, according to Deuteronomy.
A Judge was cleared to teach from scripture as he/she gave a verdict, according to Deuteronomy. Since in Judges 4, men went to Deborah to be judged, a woman could teach men, even in the Old Covenant in a public setting.
If your beliefs can't explain all this, they must be false.
Lol okay.
Honestly miss, your character and conduct speaks for itself. You attack and slander and demean as if this was some worldly political debate between non-believers rather than a discussion among brothers and sisters about The Word of God. Suggesting that people who teach complimentarianism just want to silence women. Talking down at everyone who responds negatively in the comments as if they were petulant children.
If you’re going to accuse someone of slander you should know what slander is. Me stating the fact that Mike Winger doesn’t present what I believe and most of the biblical egalitarians I know believe is my honest evaluation. You can disagree if you want but I’m free to share my thoughts and opinions on the matter. You have some kind of strange idea that somehow battling the lies of the world is different than fighting the lies within the church. If anything should be fought against with the most vigilance it should be the lies that people of faith embrace causing so much damage to the church. I don’t think you clearly see this issue as it is. It’s a fact that complementariainism silences women. That’s the ideal for a comp woman.. silent, submissive, obedient and under the authority of men.
@@DivineDissident Vigilance great, belittling brothers and sisters, not so great. You seem to be doing a lot of belittling in these comments. Even in your reply to me just now you spoke down to me as if I was a petulant child. I don’t think that you should go about Biblical discussion in such a manner. I know as a Biblical scholar you would agree.
@@afrodude203 You’ve basically stated you know my character and then falsely accused me of slander either not knowing what it is or intentially misusing it. Slander is when you know the truth about someone but present lies on purpose in order to tarnish them. That’s a pretty serious accusation. I don’t think you should expect a flowery response. However if you thinking someone correcting and explaining something to you makes you a petulant child, I don’t know what to say, that’s your own perception which seems strange to me. I do agree with you that how we go about discussion is important. The problem with this topic is that people are damaging real women with their theology and twisting the Bible to support it. Yes I know I come off as having a little attitude in the video which actually wasn’t my intent when I made it but being on camera is new to me and I’m working on it. As far was what I said and what I’ve commented I think it’s fine. I kinda look at it like this. Imagine when slavery was legal and people are speaking out and then they get attacked for their tone or something else. Or people give ridiculous reasons slavery should be legal. How would you respond to comments like that? People trying to uphold injustice in the name of God? People literally making arguments as to why we should be able to steal people from their homes and keep them as servants for life? And using the Bible to argue for it? I imagine you’d be calling them out on the bs too. This was a reality at one time. The country literally split over it and it was the southern Christians who really wanted to keep their slaves… that’s where we get the term southern baptists. It’s funny that it’s like some of the same groups generations later still using scripture to subjugate women under men and doing it with the Bible. It is a kind of slavery or second class in the church for women. Complementarianism was created as a means to stop women from becoming preachers and having equality in the home. To maintain tradition and shut down opposing discussion.
Let God be true, and every man a liar that’s all I’ll say.
Amen! If only people actually believed this. If they did there might not be so much reliance on the views and opinions of men throughout history rather than reliance on God and studying for themselves to see what is true. Just because something is popular or commonly accepted, even in the church, doesnt make it right.
As a Christian woman, my wish is that as believers we could come to scripture with a heart posture of, "Lord I am open to see whatever You truly meant when inspiring these writers. Regardless of what we would like to see, make Your truth known". This takes a huge load of humility and surrender. I am preaching to myself also, as there are some verses that my own heart wrestles with (and it is usually due to my own self will not wanting to bend the knee). At the end of the day, it's not the theological name for the group that matters, a council that was formed in the 90's, or having my own view and feelings validated on the matter. Only God's word matters. I do feel that if we take scripture at face value however, it seems to indicate quite clearly a more complementarian view. I do not mean a view where men are tyrannical rulers and Mike Winger calls out that kind of behaviour as well. Certainly, that isn't scriptural. From what I see, it just seems to indicate different positions in creation. Why should that bother me as a women? Why do so many women despise the value of their roles? It's so beautiful and needed. If we could just rest in the nonpartial love of the Father and enjoy the both very good roles He has created. God bless you sister!
I really love this comment! I think we could all learn a lot coming with an open heart!! I would recommend my full series in response to Mike. My main frustration is the misrepresentation of egalitarian beliefs especially for those who really want to learn! God bless you as well!
ruclips.net/p/PL0_rYtMd528LgEX0lOibIUt0i4unPqkRc
@@DivineDissident I just want to honour the Lord above anything. And the bonus is (I truly believe) if He says for us to follow something, or creates us for a certain role (as complementarianism would argue and more importantly, I believe scripture states) that really is His best and is to our and the body of Christ’s benefit.
And ok thank you for the link to your video! I still want to finish Mike Wingers 11 hour video on the topic and then I will watch yours. My response may take some time aha!
@@Rnadc37 I understand. I was comp for about 30 years. I do think we all do have roles to play but that it has very little do to with our sex. I look forward to hearing your comments and thoughts?
@@DivineDissident Well thanks so much for engaging in conversation :) yes we will continue in the near future!
I'm assuming the term complimentarian only came about as a name for the traditional view once egalitarianism was starting to gain traction. Much as the term "straight" only came into existence once acceptance of homosexuality became more widespread. The fact that the term complementarianism didn't exist until this stage may not convey that it was a new idea, but rather an old idea that no one had thought to question until that time and that was so accepted it didn't even need a label.
Your comment perfectly illustrates the problem. You are assuming rather than actually knowing the history. The traditional view is quite different than complementarianism.
Here you make statements saying maybe this or maybe that without any of the facts, which is what most of the people in the comments are doing when they make this statement. People will be carried away by their own assumptions or claims that people make, without ever caring to take the time to find what is true. This is the sad state of many people who hold one view without truly examining it, the history and why it came to be. The entire point of my channel is about examining things critically for myself and encouraging others to do the same, rather than walking in blindness and ignorance. Your comment illustrates how people live "by one's own understanding" rather than gaining the evidence to see the facts and then make an educated and righteous judgment.
Mike Winger’s response he supported biblically and what I gather from scripture. Can you provide a couple Bible verses or chapters that I can read that might support your argument?
Please see the video featured on my channel, its the start of a series (4 videos so far) that explores the egalitarian view as well as responds to Winger.
mike
I post on the subject of men and women being equal
before God, everyday. Reply if desired for a discussion, scriptures, etc.
Oh she just refines and retranskates anything that disagrees. She forms an opinion of what scripture should say to her, and then forces it anyways she can to make it fit that idea.
Complimentarian >>>>>>> egalitarian
“according to wikipedia”
We love you Mike Winger!
Mike is lebron james and you’re like a 5th grade basketball player. He’s literally the most objective and thorough bible teacher on RUclips. No allegiance to denominations or tribes. He’s speaking objective truth.
😂😂😂 if anyone sounds like a 5th grader it's you. What Mike presents isn't egalitarianism. Those who claim otherwise simply don't know better, don't fact check, and sadly I don't think you understand what objective truth is. Oh and by the way, if you know anything about Jesus taught you know that He has no problem using a "5th grader" to shame the "wise".
This video is a worldly reason why I'm a complementiarian. (I'm a ultimately complementairian because of the Bible)
If this women can't base her argument in the Bible, but has to go to Wikipedia, that's not a good sign. I know all females aren't like this..... so maybe I'm just happy that she herself isn't a pastor.
A worldly reason? Because I cited wikipedia for a date? That's just silly. My argument has nothing to do with Wikipedia and my source of study is certainly not Wikipedia, it just a place anyone can go to verify the date that complementarianism was coined. Since everyone knows and can use it they can verify the date and understand that comp theology is very new and not the traditional biblical view. Also if you visited my channel and saw my other videos you would see I have various long form videos looking at and studying the Bible on this subject.
The first video of my Egalitarian response to Mike's Women in Ministry series:
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
This response says way more about you than about her.
As a white male I have read and heard and really enjoyed the works of Elisabeth Elliot, Helen Roseveare and others. I believe they had no qualms with what we call today Complimentarians. They knew God's Word and applied it as they wanted to glorify Christ in all they said and did. They did much to further God's Kingdom for their part. Why is it that we must have life the way we see justice and not just do life the way we should from God's Word? Why not rejoice in how God has made us in His image and then get on with the carrying our crosses and loving those who are lost into the kingdom? Why even worry about how I look to my fellow believers? For me to live is Christ, to die is gain.
I am glad that you have benefited from women's writings. Interestingly, I just read today some history about Elisabeth Elliot and the horrible things she dealt with in her 3rd marriage. Her theology kept her in abuse and those teachings similar to complementarianism hurt other women as well. I'd encourage you to watch my first video about my egalitarian journey, I think you will see that the things you have stated that you value have been my pursuit and that its been a change in perspective that has brought me to see even more clearly what it means to be made in God's image, our importance in the body, and what love looks like, etc.
My Egalitarian Journey
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
maybe you could tell me what sort of abuse Elliot was dealing with? Where do you hear this? From her daughter? Sorry, seems a bit like someone was looking for something...@@DivineDissident
@@tomcampbell9773 interesting how you already assume the worst. I had previously just before you wrote this comment read an article about Elliot. You can read it here:
therevealer.org/elisabeth-elliot-flawed-queen-of-purity-culture-and-her-manipulative-third-husband/?fbclid=IwAR1Vb-mRwflv_hAW9EsjR_EqF18iFUjPk4RR1NvnGeii_WoM8FkfHU8ksjs
Also this is based off the two part authorized biography written by Ellen Vaughn
EDIT: I also dont particularly agree with everything in the article, but I read a wide variety of Christian views and can still benefit even if I dont agree with everything an author writes or believes. I like to read a wide variety of views within Christian culture to understand different perspectives. I focused more on the second half of the article that talked about what Elizabeths 3rd marriage was like, quoted from the biography.
A 900 page book is a bit long... however, I am not sure I was assuming the worst here. I live in Germany. My wife and one daughter are doctors. The other 3 daughters are really quite incredible as well. It wasn't just Elliot's theology, it is about her God. The one described in God's Word. The one that has a book "written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain." The God who forgives us when we certainly don't deserve it. The one who wrote this book, the Bible, for our good, also when other humans don't treat us as they should. I think we shouldn't judge. @@DivineDissident
@@tomcampbell9773 I understand what you are saying but it’s confusing the gospel and God with gender roles. I would really encourage you to watch my series in response to Mike. The first video is featured on my RUclips page. Elizabeth taught a lot of good things but her theology specifically on the function of men and women kept her trapped in an abusive marriage. Only hours after her marriage she realized she made a mistake and unfortunately she was trapped in that until she died. We have a theology about marriage that keeps people trapped in marriages with serial vow breakers, manipulators and people who faked who they were before marriage knowing that their spouse would not divorce them once they discovered their true colors. I have experienced this as well as many other women. God has not created a system that traps women like this, people have and have misused scripture to keep them there.
She sounds incredibly upset, I’d advise letting the scriptures and spirit teach you rather than trying to justify a viewpoint
I have every right to be upset, when someone comes along and totally misrepresents what Egalitarians believe and why. I have a whole series dedicated to explaining how and why.
That guy judges everyone., gossips, and is slanderous.
I am a believer in the divine feminine. Its necessary.
❤ 11 hour Mike Winger just dropped y'all! ❤ As a protestant, it's funny seeing another protestant state something isn't correct because of when it's term was coined is just silly.
yes Ive noticed!! Almost finished it and am working on a response :) I agree, it would be ridiculously silly to say something isnt correct because of when it was coined, but thats not at all what I said! Most people just arent aware how new the view is, and that its not the traditional view. The history of it is important.
@DivineDissident I don't mean to misunderstand, and maybe I answered from a place of .....wanting to stick up for someone important to me. I will fully admit I'm not qualified to have much of an opinion. I'm only 2 years in to being a Christian. I apologize for responding hastily and will give more thought to what I say in the future. God bless!
I’ll stick with Mike on this one. His research exponentially outweighs what you’ve brought to the table. Praise be to God that I have a rightful place within His will 🤗
Maybe don’t be so quick to jump to a conclusion after a 60 second video. I have a whole series in response to Mike and many more videos to add to it. Mike is almost done with his series and I’m just getting started. Check out the first video
My Egalitarian Journey: A response to Mike Winger's Women in Ministry Series
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
@@DivineDissident thank you but the Bible brought me to this conclusion before Mike ever started his series. Unlike Mike (who at the beginning of his series really hoped his research would lead him to be egalitarian) I was already rooted in what the Bible says on the matter. Good luck with your series hopefully your research brings you to the conclusion that lines up biblically. If it’s true research I have no doubt it will 🙂
@@amarie2242
Be careful who teaches you. Jesus or Paul.
And do not call anyone on earth your father; for only One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
-excerpt Matthew 23
-words of Jesus
For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers...
-excerpt 1 Corinthians 4 KJV
-words of Paul
It might be helpful if you would share some of those “better resources” you refer to in this clip… I personally wouldn’t go any further in listening to your material unless you provided something substantive…
Hello and thanks for your comment. This video links to my full series in response to Mike where I present resources and arguments to substantiate my claims. The first video in the series is featured at the top of my youtube channel.
Yeah. I do t need to bother to watch this channel to know I’ll stick with Mike Winger.
Yeah, just ignore what ALL egalitarians are saying… that Mike doesn’t present egalitarianism accurately… and listen to one guy who read a few books about it…. And trust without bothering to fact check what he said. That seems to be what most are doing rather than doing the work themselves.
You're talking about different "movements" not what Scripture says.You say "Much much better resources with much better Biblical arguments." What does that even mean?...Study the Word via the Bible. PERIOD..You are causing strife between men and women AND u have NO IDEA what you are talking about..Please stop creating content that is not conducive to True Biblical Scripture.. I AM a Christian woman AND Seminary student... Read the Word, Study the Word, KNOW the Word...BTW, there is NO BETTER RESOURCE, than the Bible... Maybe u hate to hear that, but it's the truth, Sorry.
Sorry its just hard not to laugh when I get judged so harshly off a 60 second short. You are preaching to the choir. I suggest taking a look at my full series in response to Mike if you are interested in what I really believe and why. I am very much into studying scripture, especially the Greek and Hebrew, as well as the history of Christianity and how certain ideas came to be. If you study like I do you will find that a lot of things that are traditional and taken for granted in many churches today have to do with the culture and ideas of men, not so much the Bible. The Bible has been used to support all sorts of things it was never intended to. The Bible is misused and taken out context to support what people want all the time. Its nothing new, its been happening for thousands of years. You can study your bible all day long, but if you see the Bible through the lens your church or seminary or whatever taught you, then you can never really see it clearly. It takes shedding those bias and asking the tough questions and looking for the answers, despite how you feel about what you might find. Its walking in faith. Why are you so keen to think I dont like to study the Bible to? I love studying scripture in its original form. You can learn so much, maybe watch my content and actually see what Im really about, because you have got me all wrong.
Bible verses supporting arguments. The Bible makes it clear that Males have roles and Females have roles.
watch my series for more information:
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
All of this argument breaks down the moment you understand that egalertarianism is a political philosophy and that Joseph Locke and Adam Smith were not creating or espousing interpretations of Christian doctrine. It can be shown that egalertarianism can only have validity when sitting within complementarianism rather than as an alternative
It all depends on ones definition of the word. Some call it Christian mutualism so as not to be confused with what you are talking about. Watch my longer form video on my channel for more info. Here I define it.
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
The church has made its position clear on this topic since the beginning. If Christ and the apostles had wanted to have women in the ordained ministry they would have made them priests and bishops and yet they did not. That alone is evidence enough for me against it.
Ah, the good ol' 'because it's always been that way' argument. I hear they used to think the Earth was flat too. Time for some ecclesiastical updates, perhaps?
@@DivineDissident It’s much more than it just “always having been that way”. It’s the way the apostles and Christ set up the structure of the Church. My point is not that’s just the way the church has done it. My point is that the reason the church has done it this way for it’s entire history is that Christ and His apostles set it up that way and therefore the church never made an attempt to change it. Do you find Jesus and the apostles to be authoritative in passing on God’s will for the church?
The spirit behind egalitarianism is the same as behind wokism.
It is the spirit of the world, and is not biblical.
That has got to be one of the most ridiculous, alarmist, untrue claims I have ever heard. I can tell you this, complementarianism is just a rerun of Genesis 3 where Adam wanted to be like God and took it upon himself to rule over Eve, though he had no right to do so. This is just the same heart and mind of Adam to continue in his sin of domination of subjugation of the female sex. Egalitarianism is believing what God said in Genesis 1 where God grants men and women equal dominion of the earth, but never over eachother. Its believing in true equality, not the fake equality of complementarianism that says we are equal in person but not in authority. Equal plus unequal is unequal. Complementarianism is just a deceptive revision of the traditional view. The historical traditional view taught up until around the 1960s was.... men were superior and women were inferior. Thats why men did the superior things and women did the inferior things. Complementarianism is basically the kind of move a politician would make to make the view more palatable, though through deception. Instead of the superior/inferior it was replaced with "different roles". The fact remains the traditional view that the church held for almost two centuries, virtually no one believes anymore. So you may want to study history and rethink your view.
I like what Justin Peters says, If you have a female pastor you have neither a pastor or a church.
I like the truth. Guys who say such things are sexist misogynists.
@@DivineDissident God is a he, Jesus is a he and the Holy Spirit is a he and HE inspired men to write what is the Bible. You don't like it, you're calling God those nanes...not me.
@@Manbunmen65 God is SPIRIT. God doesn't have sex organs.
She has “More biblical based arguments” and quotes wiki and not The Bible. You can’t make this up. There is no need to quote 3rd party sources. Get it from the source! The word of God! IN CONTEXT!! I love you sister. ❤️
ROFL You cannot use the bible to cite a date for something that happened in 1988 :P
This short is my opinion, not an argument. If you want to see my arguments from the bible its right here, please start from the first video:
A former Complementarian turned Egalitarian responding to Mike Winger's Women in Ministry Series
ruclips.net/p/PL0_rYtMd528LgEX0lOibIUt0i4unPqkRc&si=5cDS5xKXTKXx42Cd
Nobody cares about what word was coined in 1988… THE BIBLE has the answers on the subject. Point blank. PERIOD. Ultimately, I do not care about either side. I care about what God thinks on the matter. I just find this very divisive and pointless to be honest. People outside of the faith laughing at us because we are debating over secondary issues. When we should be preaching the gospel to all nations and pointing people to the direction of Christ. This is foolishness.
@@kingorangejulius1517 Actually a lot of people do. Especially because its a man made ideology. The history around the emergence of this is incredibly interesting. History is important, and when you dont study history you dont learn the mistakes not to repeat. Not caring is a problem because GOD CARES. You are right that those arguing over who has more authority are divisive and pointless, but those who embrace freedom and liberty in Jesus are trying to bring that freedom to others stuck in bondage. That is worth ALL the effort, and is in line with what Jesus taught. Its those trying to oppress and trying to stuff people into boxes and imposing legalistic rules that result in people on the outside wondering what is wrong with us. People call this a “secondary issue”… sure you dont need to believe either way to actually become a believer, but its definitely a PRIMARY concern in the church because it has to do with the BODY functioning in a HEALTHY way. When the body is not functioning in a healthy way then the WHOLE BODY SUFFERS. That is not of secondary importance, you can preach the gospel all day but if you ignore those who are hurting even within your own church walls that is the exact opposite of what the Bible teaches. The Bible teaches that the church would be known by what? How well we preach? No. How well we love eachother. And what’s happening is not love. Women being put as secondary beneath men is not love. Women’s gifts being treated as less important than mens is toxic and demeaning. And Im happy to argue that from scripture. You are jumping to conclusions over a 60 second short instead of to my series where I argue heavily from the scriptures. If you are going to have an opinion on what I believe, actually hear what I have to say. We can preach the gospel all day to the nations and fail as a church if the way the church functions is toxic. In fact we might actually do more damage to others if our concern is just preaching and not actually LIVING it amongst each other in love. Actions speak louder than words friend.
@@DivineDissident Salvation is the #1 primary issue. No if ands or buts. Our hearts should be weeping for those who do not know Christ. It’s just the fact you call out Mike by name and then slap “propaganda” after an over 20 hour series. It’s, imma say it again, FOOLISHNESS. Mike, in no way, is demeaning the importance of women and neither am I. Women are just as crucial in the household and body regardless of what role or position. You may FEEL this that and the other about this subject. But that’s all it is….feelings. Feelings are deceiving as the word clearly states.
@@kingorangejulius1517 And our hearts should be weeping due to the lack of love in the church. Jesus said that God's two greatest commands were to love God and love oneanother. So love is certaintly of primary concern. Paul said there is nothing greater than love! And when the church doesnt even grasp what love even is that results in disaster. Dont worship the gospel, worship Jesus. Dont worship evangelism, follow Jesus. Actions speak louder than words. This obsession with the gospel at the EXPENSE of EVERYTHING ELSE is toxic and unbiblical. Jesus taught us many things that all have great importance.
All I said was that Mike misrepresents egalitarianism and doesnt understand it. But it takes someone well versed in the egalitarian view to actually see that. People who dont know what egalitarians believe tuned into Mike and got an inaccurate picture, thats a fact. Pretty much any egalitarian who has any respect for the bible can confirm that what Mike presented was not egalitarianism.
Dont vilify feelings. In case you didnt know feelings and emotions are part of what it means to be made in the image of God. Manipulators and liars tells you not to trust your feelings so that they can control you more. Dont destroy your own humanity thats made in God's image.
The Bible is crystal clear. Women have no authority over men to teach. You can disagree all you want, its not an opinion its Gods design. Of your souce is not the Bible, its not only irrelevant, but sinful.
Thats your opinion. You can think that all you want but that doesnt mean you right and nothing in scripture lays out what you are saying as God's design. Church tradition has a lot to do with what men in history thought and how they saw the bible in light of what they already believed, rather than actually seeing the bible unbiased and on its own. That is not surprising and is natural as everyone has bias. I have a whole series covering what I believe based on scripture.
“There are much better resources out there” …
Proceeds to only give Wikipedia as a source of information 😂😂😂
I have a whole series dedicated to the actual research. Wikipedia was only used as an example for the every day person to easily verify a date. Wikipedia has its value for SOME things, though I would not use it for theological study.
😂 ruclips.net/video/NMXvj5EspZo/видео.htmlsi=VG_P5YNPzpgx61IK
@DivineDissident then you should have referenced them... but you didn't, so you failed
Oohhh please! The reason it wasn't addressed is because it was never challenged. What a tremendous theological source, Wikipedia! Give me a break.
What are you talking about? Complementarianism was challenged before it even had a name. I never used wikipedia as a theological resource. It was used to reference a date that any could confirm. Here's the history virtually no one seems to know:
ruclips.net/video/_SYAf3ACsa8/видео.htmlsi=OyoneLBBSXzMWTay
The Bible shows Jesus purposely showed his resurrected self FIRST to a woman so she could speak it to the apostles, and the FIRST evangelist is a woman. This is biblical proof that Jesus knew that woman would be dealing with bigotry and he purposely left these pictures that were hard to leave out of the narrative.
Amen! God repeatedly chooses women and also corrected the disciples a few times in regards to how they viewed women. Jesus liberated women, who are men to bring them under subjection again?
@@DivineDissidentPerfect example of bad biblical application in both the comment and the reply.
I understand The truth isnt always easy to swallow, but Gods Word is clear. Im with Mike on this
No the truth isn't easy to swallow which is why complementarianism even exists. Check out my video on the history:
ruclips.net/video/_SYAf3ACsa8/видео.htmlsi=2kIPx_Dq5SR6MQ-d
Thank you for clearing that up.
Thanks to this passive-aggresive reading of a snippet from an unvetted Wikipedia article, I am no longer in danger of believing the facts based arguments Mike Winger provided after hundreds of hours of study, complete with biblical evidence to support each claim. Thanks kind stranger!
In case you didn't notice this short links to my full series in response to Mike that I have been adding videos to for over a year now. Also this isn't a reading from wikipedia, I simply stated the date complementarianism was created because I know virtually everyone can google a date, and when you google a date you often get wikipedia. This was a simple way for anyone to verify that complementarianism is new, since everyone seems to falsely believe that comp is the historical view, which it is not.
Keep out the sarcasm and provide some sources beyond wikipedia, and i might believe you.
If people cannot handle a little bit of sass I really could care less. It’s my personality take it or leave it that’s true to who I am and I will be myself on here. If anything I will include some just to spite the tone police. This video in particular is more sassy than normal and more than I intended when I made it, but it seems for that very reason to be doing well bringing people to my channel so make of that what you will. I do have a whole series in response to Mike that relies on studying the scriptures as well as historical evidence. The first video is featured on my RUclips home page. Have a great day! 😊
This didn’t age well for her
I disagree. This short is leading people to watch my full series and understand the problems with Mikes misrepresentation of what egalitarians believe and why.
@@DivineDissident you can say you made a great argument but don’t lie and say the majority of these comments are in favor of you or make you more listenable. I think you should study what speaks to mikes fan base and then start with positive feedback followed by helpful critique. I think the problem people are having is your lack of using Socrates triple filter test before making a comments; is it true. Is it good. Is it useful.
Like what? Show me a source where both sides of the argument are examined with scripture in context and encourages people to study the bible with as little bias and they can humanly manage. Most egalitarian (and strict complimentarian) sources I have found pull scripture or stories that they stretch to fit their preferred narrative. It seems that the only leadership role that the bible reserves for men is the position of elder in the church. That has been MW’s point so far.
Before you send me to the article you posted on the other comment know that I just read it and I see the same problems in other egalitarian arguments. I encourage you to actually watch MW series and look at the scriptures along with him. I’m not saying he is infallible there have been opinions he has that I don’t agree with 100% but he approaches this subject very charitably in my opinion.
Dont get me wrong I appreciate his INTENT. The problem is that he doesn't accurately represent the egalitarian view and also makes a lot of statements from the comp side without any proof or argument that substantiates his claims. His foundation in Genesis is based more on creative interpretation, inferences and opinion. There are much better books and resources that more accurately represent the egalitarian side. Mike didnt really choose the best books for reference. I would be happy to recommend books or resources for the egal side. Everyone is biased, And Mike comes from a foundation of comp theology and assumes certain things to just be so in his series. I would be happy to discuss further.
How God Sees Women by Terran Williams is a great resource for the Egal side.
terranwilliams.com/
You can also take a look at my first video of my Egalitarian response to Mike Winger's series series:
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
A video by video, point by point, Egalitarian response Mike Winger's series by author Terran Williams:
terranwilliams.com/articles/
THE ONLY way you are going to get as little bias as possible is to study both sides AND HISTORY for yourself. The best teachers out there dont tell you what to think, they just help you think for yourself.
You lost me at "Wikipedia"......where's the bible in all this? Book, chapter, verse in their proper context!?!🤦🏿♂️
Its in my full series in response to Mike that Ive been creating videos on for over a year now. This short even links directly to it. Do you really think Id put all that in a 60 second short?!?
@DivineDissident Yeah, I watched it, and you used your personal experience and changes in societal culture to manipulate scriptures. I mean, I'm sorry you went through what you went through in the past with men, but the bible is clear. Women teach younger women and children, not over men. If to prophesy, let it be through testimony under the unction of the spirit.
I'm getting undertones of feminism while I was watching.
Titus 2:3-5
1 Tim 5:14
1 Peter 3:4
1 Corinthians 14:33-35
If you want an example of a true woman of God take after Elizabeth Elliott, Amy Carmichael look them up.
Even in scripture look at Ruth, Rachel, Esther pay close attention to their spirit.
@@EM4Christ7 I dont think you did watch it, because I went through 1 Corinthians 11-14 in that video. You bringing up 14:33-35 would seem to indicate you didnt really follow or watch the part of the video that dealt directly with that verse. Nothing about it was about my experience or culture. It was about what Paul was teaching. He doesnt tell women to use their gifts in the congregation and speak by prophesying and then tell them to be silent. Thats contradictory. He is being specific, probably addressing specifically those who are being disruptive. Paul doesnt spend 3 chapters telling men and women how to use their gifts and prophesy publicly in the congregation and then undo the previous chapters of instruction by silencing women. Silencing disruption is not the same as silencing gifting and participation. to think so requires twisting everything to fit a narrative of silencing women. I dont think you really know the women of the scriptures. Rachel was a shepherd. Ruth took it upon herself to basically propose to Boaz, and Esther was the most defiant of them all, defying the King’s rules to go before him facing the punishment of death as a woman for doing so. She was called by God to so to save her people. Traditional feminism is not a bad thing sir, feminism is just the movement that is against women being oppressed simply for being women. If you are anti-feminist are you FOR the oppression of women? Are you for disrespecting and dishonoring females simply because of their sex? Do you think they should not be allowed to vote, to have jobs, to get an education? Women being free to do these things, thats what traditional feminism is. I dont think you even know what “undertones of feminism” even means. Most people in the church cannot even define feminism. Radical feminism is a completely different animal and most people dont support it. I dont really know anyone who does. Radical feminism is more like just hatred and animosity towards men in general which is not biblical or Christlike. But everyone being treated with respect as human beings made in the image of God.. thats what traditional feminists is, its about everyone being valued equally, NOT BEING THE SAME. God is not a respecter of persons. Your age, race, sex, station, or gender makes no difference in your value as a human being. We all come into the world with nothing and take nothing with us. Sadly people are so caught up in their rules and does and donts they miss Jesus and everything he taught. They don’t practice what the greatest teacher came to show us and set an example for us. The typical church has become so corrupt with its politics, manmade rules, and and gender hierachy, and pastors too concerned with ruling and being authorities over people rather than serving. People are so blinded they cannot see…
Everyone is bias lol, what does the bible say?
Thats what I am covering in my series on my channel. This is just a short clip. You can go to my channel and watch the first video of the series. Its the featured video at the top. And the full series is under podcasts. Im working on the 3rd video right now.
@@DivineDissident Fair enough, I just tend to be skeptical about people claiming Mike was trying to give both sides with total neutrality. He basically said, here's were I'm at, I studied the other side and I was disappointed. I'm in the same boat. You mentioned the newness of the term complementarian(the word trinity wasn't in scripture but summarized something scripture described). I don't know how the church through most of its history could get this wrong and then in no coincidence with the western culture in the last 100 years a some scholars who have a lower immune system to liberalism(no offense to anyone but this is my observation) found the secret. As if God could be contained by patriarchy, that's a weaker God.
@@DeJay14 What have you studied concerning egalitarianism? Sources matter, and every argument is going to have its weak and strong arguments. Even complementarians admitted the church has been wrong for over 1500 years, thats one of the reasons for complementarianism for the first place. Its not the same as the historical view. The video Im working on right now is all about the history of the church and how we got to we are today. The traditional view was that women could not lead because they were inferior, not as smart or even capable of teaching or leading. That was proved to be false so the traditional idea was tossed and the church was left in a state of panic. Two sides arose. One said that women are equal but still subordinate to men and the other side said women are equal and not subordinate to men. They were the hierarchists and the egalitarians (who believed in the complementarity of the sexes). The debate went on for decades. Then came along George Knight the 3rd, John Piper, Wayne Grudum and other men who came up with something new. Equal but different “roles”. In a stroke of genius (though I would say deceptive) they coined their new view complementarianism, basically taking a term that was used for egalitarians. They created the council on biblical manhood and womanhood to spread this new theology far and wide and convinced church after church to come on board and sign the Danvers statement. Equal but different roles sounded good and churches who were in crisis on what to teach quickly agreed. And so the debate kind of died. Every year people in ministry on the comp side have to reaffirm and sign the Danvers statement if they want to keep their jobs. Its not about people determining for themselves, having open debate. A lot of it is about control and keeping women in “their place” and discouraging debate on the topic. These are just some of the things Im going to cover in my video Im working on right now.
@@DivineDissident I have read from egalitarian and complementarian sides of it but I tend to stay away from ism's. What was the practice biblically. Who has the strongest arguments. If youre trying to use the genetic fallacy with complementarian statements and views then I don't find that convincing. Neither should anyone else for that matter.
"Calvinism" for example, came about in Christian history but really reaffirmed doctrines that many already affirmed(Election for example, was confirmed by Augustine). we just gave it a name. Again, you and I might believe in a different God if you think Patriarchy was strong enough to hold the Holy Spirit back for 1900 year's. Someone a modern western lens discovered what Christians across the globe, and throughout history buy in large couldn't. Are we more enlightened than the church of the east? The African Church? I don't mind watching videos but, like Mike Winger, please don't be upset if I don't find them convincing.
@@DeJay14 you are right that simply the origination of something doesnt invalidate an argument, but the reason behind why something was created is important, especially if it was done as a means to protect power, and especially if it was twisting truth for an agenda. Its important to look at all sides and examine everything with scripture. Today Im working on the history of things which Mike Winger didnt cover.
Mike is not a good resource for egalitarian information…
Also, according to Wikipedia…
Woman created as helpmate has a reference to complimentariansm. Woman compliments men. The two become one. They each have a role. I’m not addressing men as patriarchal over women though we see that in many cultures. I’m referring the woman complimenting the man, being his helpmate. I think the proverbs 31 woman is the pattern. Respects her husband, shows him honor, but he better listen to her. She is over the home and family.
Thanks for your comment. "helpmate" is such a misunderstood translation of the Greek (Ezer Kenegdo) which should read more like "suitable ally". The Word EZER is most often used to describe GOD who comes to the aid of someone in need. God is not a little subserviant helper, and neither is Eve. No. God comes as a powerful ally to help, or bring aid to one in need. Adam was in need. It wasnt good for him to be alone, so God made a suitible, powerful, capable ally to complete the creation. Adam needs Eve and Eve needs Adam. The two were made from ONE. The definition of patriarchy is a system where men have more power than women do. That describes pretty much every complementarian church.... where only men are leaders... which is the literal definition of patriarchy.
Notice how they take a word and try to make Eve out to be like God. Funny how that's what the devil tried to do... funny indeed.....
@@Mathetesofscripture i notice how you are twisting things to imply some kind of evil rather than understanding what the Hebrew word actually means and how it’s used. Twisting what people say is also something Satan does.
@DivineDissident I've implied sinful, which all humans are. You've literally said that Eve and God are described the same way, then drawn lines to show that women are like God to men, and that women came to aid and rescue Adam. You imply what scripture does not teach explicitly, but when thousands of years of church history does the same, you claim the church, the body of christ, was wrong for thousands of years. You have an agenda clearly, which is not based on honesty. Many commentors have mentioned this as well, your fruits are anger, slander, dishonesty, hypocrisy, reviling, and division.
@@Mathetesofscripture God helping someone and Eve helping someone doesn’t make them the same just because they both “helped” someone. That’s a twisting of what I said to say that Im claiming Eve is like God. Though technically all humans are made in the LIKENESS of God. But I don’t think that was what you were trying to imply. The Hebrew describes Eve as an Ezer and God as an Ezer. Anyone who wants to can look that up and confirm this is a fact. The word literally means to aid or rescue when someone is unable to do that on our own. Our english uses the word “helper” which people often misunderstand it as being a little helper, rather than a powerful ally coming to aid or rescue which is what the word means. The kind of “help” Eve is, is the same kind of help a powerful ally would send to someone who needed aid in battle. You may not like that Eve is described this way in the Bible, but it is how she is described. There would be no reason to be angry about this unless you want to view Eve as a weak little subordinate helper rather than a strong and capable ally who comes to aid Adam. It seems the main thing Adam needed to be rescued from was loneliness, incompleteness, the lack of companionship with an equal being. Eve is that companion, that equal counterpart. Together there is unity and wholeness. Instead of looking into this for yourself and studying the Hebrew you want to attack me for having an “agenda” or making God and Eve the same which I am clearly not. No one is saying they are the same, but the same Hebrew word is used to describe the function they performed in certain scenarios. I think a lot of people like yourself might be projecting your own bad fruits as you have accused me of. Thats a pretty common occurrence Ive seen in comp culture and in this comment section. I’m here to promote a unified body, where men and women are all working together with their unique gifting. All having a voice and loving one another. If you watch enough of my channel its not hard to see what I am about which is love in action. Sure there is anger towards those who seek to destroy that, those who seek to divide as comp culture does… silencing women and putting men and women in these tiny little boxes based on a few verses. I am about liberation, unity, honesty, truth and love. And I am against anything that seeks to destroy that which I know comp culture does… comp culture is about human hierachy, human power, human rules and roles where everyone fits in like cookie cutter piece. Women are really the only ones restricted in this culture from certain things. I embrace freedom. Nothing I am doing shows the fruits you accuse of. In this particular short I was a bit snarky towards those who oppress but thats not the end of the world. The oppression is the real problem and there is plenty of REAL evidence of division, dishonesty, hypocrisy, slander and reviling used to silence anyone who disagrees with them.
Either you or Mike is right at the end of the day. It seems clear in Scripture that women cannot exercise authority over men within the Body of Christ. This is the order God made it. I’d fear the Lord and really seek Him in this area. It’s a grave danger to say something about scripture that isn’t true, irregardless of the topic.
It only seems clear if you never look at the Greek or Hebrew when you study the bible. The reality is that when something is translated from one language to another the reader must first interpret it, then they translate their interpretation into another language. Some things get lost in translation, misinterpreted and just outright mistranslated. If you dont do your due diligence to look at the evidence you will never know. The word for "exercise authority" in 1 Tim 2:12 didnt mean exercise authority when Paul wrote it. words change over time and it wasnt until centuries later that the word changed in meaning at the time bibles were being translated into Latin and later into english. Also the bible never ever says that any "exercising of authority over others" is good! in fact, every single time this comes up in scripture it is ALWAYS bad. In 3 of the gospels Jesus tells the disciples who are arguing about who is the greatest that they are not to be like the gentiles and exercise authority over others, then we have 1 tim 2:12, and then only two other times is this phrase "exercise authority found". Who does it describe? The antichrist who exercises authority over people. Nothing in the bible ever prescribes this as good. Jesus said that those who want to be leaders, those who want to be great are to become the lowest servants. Theres a reason deacon was used to describe church leaders and ministers like Paul. The word means servant. They were following after what Jesus instructed, to be servants to the sheep, not authorities ruling over and commanding them. And dont tell me that Paul commanded this or that, he was instructing people in new churches that didnt know anything. He was planting churches. Someone had to teach them, but he didnt command obedience. In fact he commended the Bereans who at first questioned Paul and studied the scriptures for themselves to see if what Paul was saying was true... that way they could decide whether or not they were going to listen to him. We ought to do the same.
@@DivineDissident k
Yeah, im going with Mike's well thought out and deeply studied thesis.
You mean you're following Paul.
So what are the qualifications of 'father'?
Paul gave himself the title of 'father', since he couldn't meet the qualifications
of elder that he himself put forward.
For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers...
-excerpt 1 Corinthians 4 KJV
-words of Paul
If one supports the qualifications of elder, as put forward by Paul, one
MUST also accept that the title/position of 'father' is valid and proper in
Christianity. Since this is also one of Paul's teachings.
But the title of 'father' was expressly forbidden by Jesus.
And do not call anyone on earth your father; for only One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
-excerpt Matthew 23
-words of Jesus
A full post on this is available. Be careful of the teachings of Paul.
Have you fact checked Mike? Its not as well thought out or deeply studied when you look into his claims and how he misrepresented his sources.
No scripture, just hidden desires and wikipedia
This is about pointing out the fact that Mike didnt present egalitarianism accurately, it wouldn't make sense to recite scripture here. What people need to do is fact check Mike and understand why Mike is getting so much backlash from egalitarians due to misrepresenting our views. If you want arguments and bible verses I have an entire series in response to Mike that Ive been adding videos to for a year now. Check that out:
ruclips.net/video/l7S9s2h0ajs/видео.html
That's because since creation, God's Word placed man as the spiritual leaders of their homes and of His Church.. It wasn't until recent times that this became an issue.
@@kellydorney3514 that claim exists no where in scripture. This is a manmade idea that people have misused scripture to support
@DivineDissident excuse me? It's every where in scripture!
@@kellydorney3514 everywhere? No, its not anywhere. People tend to see it everywhere because they have been indoctrinated to see things that aren’t really in the text. Genesis 1-3, Ephesians 5, 1 Timothy, 1 Corinthians 11 and 14. People argue all sorts of things the text never says, and ignore what the rest of the Bible says that speaks to the contrary of male idolatry.
@DivineDissident It's from Genesis through the end of the Bible. What is "no where" is instructions for women to be pastors or elders. Find that verse. Now, we are all equal under Christ, and our Heavenly Father at His Discretion has given gifts of ministry to each person. But God is a God of structure, and though we are all the same in Christ, we have different roles. Pastors and Elders are not to be women. They are to be the husband of one wife, etc. In Genesis, Eve took from the forbidden fruit, but their eyes were not opened until Adam ate. All of God's design throughout the Old Testament was that men were to led spiritually. The Levitical priesthood, Jesus's disciples, the Apostles, and leaders of the NT church. The instructions about establishing and running the NT church was to be through a Godly and upright man, husband of one wife.
Ephesians speaks to the Structure of God's Authority, through Christ, and His Church, through the Husband to his wife. When I'm doing a deliverance for a child, the father must agree to allow and desire Jesus in, and satan honors that, he has to. But Jesus's ministry couldn't have happened without the wonderful woman that supported it. And it was the woman that were at the tomb while the men were hiding. We are the same but have different roles. That's doctrine and that's God's Word.✝️
@@kellydorney3514 I address all these misunderstandings in various videos. Here’s one that may be of interest:
ruclips.net/video/E-3aThyjkuw/видео.htmlsi=e1WBDzTJ1kN_HFWS
I'm so sorry your comment section looked like this with people thinking this short was representative of all you had to offer in rebuttal. It's just proof of how deep all of this goes. Dealing with this issue is part of what caused me to experience a deep hatred for my femaleness and it's something I still struggle with to this day. I'm on and off with my faith, and I'm not sure exactly where I'll end up at the end of it. But thanks anyway for still trying to direct others to biblical alternatives for what ultimately amounts to human cultural biases. All the best. ❤
Thank you for your thoughtful words. Im very sorry that the toxic parts of Christian culture has had such an impact on your life. I went through a lot of abuse and felt cold towards God for awhile. It wasnt until I escaped those bad circumstances and started to study the bible anew, letting go of all my previous ideas that had been drilled into my head by churches that I started to understand scripture in a whole new way. I cannot tell you how much I wept when I finally saw how God saw me as a woman. Fully loved, completely equal to men, valued, gifted, precious in the sight of God. I now know the Lord is not very happy with how his daughters are being treated. It is sad that the natural inclination of the male sex is typically to dominate. You can see it all throughout the bible starting with Adam. As soon as they were leaving the garden... Eve's desire was for her husband and Adam's desire and action was to rule over her. As soon as sin entered the world so did this power dynamic and lust for power and women have suffered. But that is NOT what Jesus taught, and Jesus brought liberation to women. He treated men and women with equal dignity, value and purpose. He commissioned women to be the first to declare the gospel, to the male disciples. God has hand picked women all throughout the bible. Though some Christians may be misogynistic and abusive and seem to think God is that way, they are mistaken. God is neither of those things. God often chooses the weak to shame the strong. God loves women. God empowers women. Thankfully we live in a time and place where women have been liberated and freed from the tyrants of men in our culture, if only the same could be said of the church. You are loved more than you could ever realize. Don't let the lies and sin of men keep you from the one who loves you, knows you and treasures you. You are a daughter of God. You are made in Gods image, fearfully and wonderfully made. Wishing you all the best as well!!! ❤
I'll be praying for you.
You literally didn’t cite a single Bible verse. No one be deceived by this woman. Mike Winger is a true teacher of Gods word (not infallible) but certainly more educated, reasoned, and thoughtful in all his responses.
of course I didnt, this short is an opinion piece meant to bring to light the fact that from an egalitarian perspective, Mike doesnt accurately present our views. However this short directly links to my full series in response to Mike where I present my arguments and study the scriptures. Im not going to do that in a 60 second short.
Ive never seen a ratio like this on youtube
Not a strong argument to mention complimentarianism isn’t a term until the 1970’s, when it was the overwhelmingly unquestioned assumption for well over 1970 years before that.
If no Levite priests were ladies, God had thousands of years to take beef with that. If Jesus strongly desires female pastors, he could have had them as apostles. He was already turning the world upside down, it wouldn’t have been “too” scandalous for him to highlight the importance of women as pastors or teachers.
as Ive responded to dozens of comments just like this already, this reflects that you dont understand the history of the historical view which is very different from complementarianism. Please educate yourself. I have a whole series in response to Mike under my podcast tab on my youtube.
The levite priest argument is so lame I dont even know where to start. Most men wouldnt even qualify to be priests. And God chose a woman as a judge, and not only just a judge but a prophet to boot. She ruled over and judged everything, even spiritual decisions in Israel. Also in the new covenant all believers are part of the royal priesthood, both men and women, so again the levite argument in the OT doesnt hold water with God's new church. Yes Jesus turned the world upside down yet people, sadly so-called "Christians", are so set on going back to OT ways of religion instead of embracing what Jesus started. Jesus started a body that was organic and alive where HE was the leader. He is the high priest and we are all priests. There is no middle man, there is no "ruling authority" besides him. There is no "authority over" when someone preaches. Every Christian with the indwelt spirit has power and authority of the Spirit, but not power over other people. People really need to go back and learn from Jesus instead of a lot of the mumbo jumbo, manmade stuff, thats being taught today as "Gods laws" just like the Pharisees did.
If one supports the qualifications of elder, as put forward by Paul, one
MUST also accept that the title/position of 'father' is valid and proper in
Christianity. Since this is also one of Paul's teachings.
But the title of 'father' was expressly forbidden by Jesus.
And do not call anyone on earth your father; for only One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
-excerpt Matthew 23
-words of Jesus
I think the letter to Timothy was pretty clear :P 😂
It is actually, but most people dont pay attention to much of anything in the letter except for a few verses, and thus dont understand the context. Jesus told the disciples not to exercise authority over anyone. The fact that women are being called out for it here means they are getting in trouble in a similar way that the male disciples did who were arguing over authority and who was the greatest. The NT never says that to lead or preach is to exercise authority, in fact Jesus prohibited his followers from that entirely. The term exercise authority is found 6 times in the NT, one where the women were called out for doing so, 3 times by Jesus who called out the disciples and told them NOT to do this, and twice speaking of the anticrhist who exercises authority over people.
But I do not allow a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man,...
-excerpt 1 Timothy 2
Refusal to accept a Judge's verdict on any matter,
resulted in execution, according to Deuteronomy.
A Judge could be a man or a woman.
Be careful of the teachings of Paul.
Even if women were allowed to be pastors, I would not want you to be mine
If women "were allowed to be pastors"... that's a good one. Plenty of women ARE pastors.
@@DivineDissident many women have the title pastor, that doesn’t mean they meet the criteria to be one. If you’re not qualified to be an elder, you’re not qualified to be a pastor. It’s difficult for a woman to be a husband of one wife, and to tend to the affairs of HIS household well..
It’s not about competence like egalitarians like to believe. It’s about the role. To say God makes no distinctions in roles in the home is unbiblical. So why is it hard to believe that he would make a distinction in roles within his church between males and females?
@@LouiseThompson-j6m many men have the title pastor but don’t have the criteria to be one. The purpose of the requirements are for character. We have men in churches all over who are wolves, abusers, con artists and degenerates. And yet people are more concerned as to whether their pastor has a penis as a qualifier rather than their godliness and character which is what the requirements are all about. Paul uses language saying “anyone who aspires to be an overseer”, “his” or “he” doesn’t exist in the Greek, it’s rather our English that says this and thus skews Paul’s meaning.
@@LouiseThompson-j6m
you wrote:
So why is it hard to believe that he would make a distinction in roles within his church between males and females?
Because of two things:
Deborah (Judges 4 and 5)
And, Paul's teachings are all over the place.
He writes that if a man is saved and uncircumcised
that he should not be circumcised, yet orders/instructs
Timothy to be circumcised.
Paul regarded himself as a 'father' and referred to
Christian men as 'sons' multiple times. Yet none of
his letters contain the qualifications to be a 'father'.
Referring to oneself as a 'father' was strictly forbidden
by Jesus.
Paul orders an execution, even though he had no
such authority to do so.
Paul states that his version of the gospel is perfect,
yet had no problem with unbelievers preaching.
Apparently believing they would also preach a
perfect gospel.
Paul states he went to Arabia after his salvation
experience, yet Acts states he did not.
etc. etc. etc.
@@8784-l3b this comment make no coherent sense..
Nothing like proving everything Mike said with this video. Kind of embarrassing for you. I would scratch the divine from your title. Dissident yes. Completely on the wrong side though.
This is the most bizarre "logic". People arent doing their due diligence to fact check Mike. Any egalitarian who knows the biblical arguments is aware that Mike isnt presenting what we believe. That's obvious to those who know the arguments. But people who are ignorant of these things, just believe him. What's embarrassing is that people are just blindly believing what Mike tells them. Mike doesn't seem to understand egalitarianism so he presents his own skewed version of what he thinks it is. Its like blind leading the blind on this topic.
I encourage everyone to listen to Santa Richter’s lecture on women in the Bible. We as Christians should not divide the church on this matter, however men need to understand what Jesus Christ was trying to emulate in. Taking women completely out of ministry does harm to both sexes in the church. If God wants to use someone to strengthen the church he will. I have witnessed many women being truly spirit filled and used by God to do great things in the church.
Everyone in the comments we need to pray for this young lady instead of attacking her back. She will only stay defensive if we do otherwise. We need to be united. 🙏🏽
You are right, we need to be united as men and women under Jesus rather than subjugating women and silencing them under male authority. There is no unity in that, only oppression. If you are going to pray, pray for yourself and for the church suffering under teachings that are hurting the whole church and showing the world our sad lack of love for one another.
@@DivineDissident I will pray for you also sister 🙏🏽
Perfect example of why woman should be silent haha.
perfect comment for my music video soon to come out featuring a collection of hate comments on my channel. this one will definitely be included.
I'm honored! Funny how you see a man quoting scripture to you as hate. your RUclips name Dissident is perfect and reveals your heart. You hate authority and rebel against it regardless if its Gods word. However thankful for the grace of God towards us both. (Be sure to include this one also since you are seeking attention). @@DivineDissident
It don’t matter what you believe or feel! What does the Bible say?
I would refer you to my full series where I lay out what the Bible teaches. Its the main video featured on my youtube page called My egalitarian journey. I spend about the last 40 minutes of the video doing Bible study.
@@DivineDissident no thanks that’s not biblical
@@terrencetaylor7308 how would you know before you even hear what someone has to say? one of the problems with Christian culture is that they learn from one person or church denomination or culture "whats biblical" and they dont really look at other views. You dont know if what I have to say is biblical or not if you wont listen, its an assumption.
I cannot think of one instance in scripture that could even come close to backing up your beliefs. They are simply what you wish the Bible said. The fact of the matter is if you put in as much time studying the truth of the word as you do trying to defend your opinion you would come to the same conclusion as Mike and the majority of pastors called by God to teach and preach the word.
I don’t know what bible you are reading… the Bible is FILLED with examples and when studied as a whole in context it does not support the claims of Winger. I suggest you check out my full series in response to Mike that covers all these things. Complementarianism is based on a handful of bible verses, most of which are pulled out of context and used as a lense to see the rest of the Bible. I prefer to use the WHOLE BIBLE as a means to understand the difficult passages. Mike spent over 11 hours on 1 tim 2:12 and never considered the whole context of the book, didnt even bother to read chapter 1 that sets up chapter 2, and then tried to argue the book was NOT primarily about false teaching. Ill be covering all these different aspects in my videos. Ive been working on creating my series in response to Mike for over a year now and have studied this topic in depth for 4 years. check out the first video in my series, its featured as the first video on my channel
@@DivineDissident So, How can anyone seriously read the letters to Timothy and Titus and the specific instructions in those books to pastors and disagree with what is being said. Instructions on who should lead the church. Not because men are any better or smarter than women… but because these are the instructions God inspired Paul to write. You are simply taking verses you disagree with and trying to convince yourself and others that you are right. At least that’s what it seems like to me. Were there women active in serving the church? Yes, but not as an authority over men. And to answer your question about what Bible I read… I read the Holy Bible. The infallible Holy Bible. The one that in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 says this about itself “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.”
2 Timothy 3:16-17 ESV
I’m praying that God will reveal the truth to you. Grace and Peace to you, Pastor Don
@@donbrown6780 Don people can seriously read the letters IN CONTEXT to understand what Paul is talking about. Basic hermeneutics requires making sure an interpretation fits with THE REST of the Bible. Most people don’t care to do this. They read a few isolated verses and think things are “clear” without doing their homework. Your English bible is not infallible. Only the original documents were inspired. When you read the english you are reading an INTERPRETATION of the Greek and Hebrew that someone has translated into english. I suggest you check out my whole series in response to Mike on my channel. The first video is featured on my youtube at the very top. You can also see the whole series under the podcast tab on my youtube page.
@@DivineDissident Do you consider yourself a pastor or Bible teacher? What are your qualifications? Are you a Greek, Hebrew and/or Aramaic scholar? I’m not sure what is so hard to understand that this speaks to differing roles God has laid out since He created man. I mean just your @divineDissident moniker says volumes. You may think you are doing Gods work but by the looks of many responses I’ve read to your attacks on Mike it seems like you should look deeper into the truth of Gods word. But thanks for the conversation.
@@donbrown6780 you are free to watch my series where I talk about all these things. Im here to make videos, not write essays in the comments section.
This isnt exactly a rebuke or anything like that but when you said "according to wikipedia" i kinda laughed and began thinking this video was just a joke until i read the comments.
"Agenda maybe?" Yeah that's ironic
You have to remember my friend that God did make male and female with different roles in the family so it is not a stretch to say that he has different church roles as well.
However this is a topic of on going study for me. I will consider your side.
Hi again! heres my full series in response to Mike. Thanks for being open minded and considering!
ruclips.net/p/PL0_rYtMd528LgEX0lOibIUt0i4unPqkRc&si=BtJsUjQcg8aWdd81
As soon as Im finished with my indepth study into 1 Tim I will post that in the playlist too!
Thanks
Catholics watching this knowing we don't do any of that 👁️👄👁️
This is just sad
Whats truly sad is the brainwashing so many people are under in comp circles, not realizing its all a bunch of manmade rules that neither God nor scripture actually supports. It harms the whole body and is nothing more than male idolatry.
Mike is correct.😊
Mike doesn't seem to even know the history of complementarianism, which to be honest virtually no one does. I didn't know it for decades. Check out my video on it:
ruclips.net/video/_SYAf3ACsa8/видео.htmlsi=G0g5sWujx3d495nI
How are we equal??? Why do we have WNBA women's basketball. And not a all gender sport?
what are you talking about? this has nothing to do with the video.
Whats so hard to understand women cannot be high priests/bishops they can be deacons….women have a place in church as much as a man but the roles are separate for a reason.
watch my full series if you are interested in learning. The first video is featured on my youtube. Women led house churches during Pauls time and women were elders for hundreds of years during the early centuries of the church. What happened was the influence of patriarchal culture stopped them. We need to get back to the early ways of the church and out from under all the man made rules that have been added. Separate “roles” are man made invvention. There are no different roles when it comes to spiritual gifting.
@@DivineDissident for the first time women were allowed to participate in the church service. They were no longer relegated to the balcony, hidden behind a curtain. They were on the main floor.
Women had been given instructions on how to pray and to prophesy in the service, but this privilege had become a disruption. The women were chattering and asking questions, which is precisely why, in the midst of the admonition to stop disturbing the service, Paul says, “If they [women] want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home” LOL you picked paul out of everyone to prove this point?
@@DivineDissident whats so hard in accepting your role ? This is why women dont preach is because you do not know your roles and want to hyper extend into the realm of a man.
@@Bornagain5.56 Just a few verses earlier in verse 26 Paul tells EVERYONE, brothers and sisters or brethren… this is referring to the whole congregation to each bring a TEACHING, a prophecy, a song, a tongue or an interpretation so that EVERYONE may have a chance to use their gifts in the assembly.
Its like if Paul was teaching and told the class. “EVERYONE bring your assignment to present on Monday. Everyone will get a chance to present in turn.” And then told some of the girls at the back of the class, you guys need to be quiet and stop asking questions in the middle of others presenting, and ask your questions later.
Paul isnt saying girls dont bring your assignment. He is saying, hey you group of girls causing disruption be quiet so EVERYONE can present their assignment.
Instead you are disregarding Pauls instruction basically in the last 3 chapters addressing EVERYONE to use their gifts for the whole congregation and focusing on a separate thing as if it erases everything else. He is telling certain women not to disrupt the other MEN AND WOMEN who have the floor. Its about speaking out of turn, not about not having a turn. The men are also told to sit down and be quiet if another stands up to prophesy. Doesnt mean that they are silent all the time. This whole section of scripture is about orderly service.
It would make perfect sense that women wouldnt understand the order as much having not been included before. They may have needed a little additional instruction on how to go about things in an orderly way.
@@DivineDissident Your under the assumption Men and Women are equal in authority and that is incorrect. What is the difference between how Adam and how eve were created? Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ” (1 Cor. 11:3)
Man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake” (1 Cor. 11:8-9) no one said women don’t have a place in church…. You just dont have the same role as a man. Case closed start being a woman today!
I don’t see love displayed here. Doesn’t even seem God centered. Seems divine dissident centered.
It's a good thing that God alone knows the heart. It's super easy for people to make all sorts of assumptions based on a whole 60 seconds. So many experts here to share their findings.
I do not have time to respond today. But will be happy to respond soon.
Egoism is evil
Patriarchy is evil
Complementary is biblical
I agree! If only people didnt equate being complementary with complementarianism.
I need some popcorn for this comment section
enjoy! 😅
"Thats not really the caayyyse".
I believe God & his written word over Wikipedia. God says MEN, not women, are to be the head pastors of the congregation. WHY? God is an a God of order/orderliness. We all have our different, but equally important roles. For me& any other serious, faithful Christian WHY doesnt even matter-just that God says so & we know he knows what hes doing & whats best for us.
Frankly, Im glad I don't have to even consider it. I have enough on my plate as a mom, gma & so much more.
Again; its not about opinion, religious beliefs, nor who coined which phrase in which year.
Its about CREATOR/Our 3rce HOLY GOD & what HE says, has always said & always will say bc HIS truth- the ONLY truth doesn't change...regardless of society & social change.
What about Lydia? She offered her home as place for believers to worship. She didnt take headship over men.
People act like they have never googled a date before. When you google a date what often shows up? wikipedia. Anyone who gives me a hard time about this is a hypocrite unless they have never googled for information, which virtually any computer literate person does all the time.
People often dont know the history which is a big part of the problem. Complementarianism was not coined to name the traditional view. But a brand new one. Complementarianism is NOT the historical view of the church that was held for almost 2000 years. The view that was held up until around the 1960s was that men were superior and women were inferior. They were not equal in personhood. I have a whole video on this that looks at the church fathers and reformers and how they viewed women. Women were "intellectually inferior" and thats why they were deemed incapable of leadership. The men did the superior tasks and the women were to do the inferior. It was even questioned whether or not women were even made in the image of God. Saying that comp was meant to describe the view since the early church is simply not true. The historical view held for most of the history of the church was largely rejected by most. Upon its rejection egalitarianism was becoming popular and they were the first ones to describe their view of men and women as complimentary. This is when those who held the traditional view had to come up with a new view because people werent accepting it anymore, because reality showed it was wrong. Women were not intellectually inferior, or inferior persons. People have been wrong on this for most of history, so comp and egal should both be looked at views emerging around the same time that the historical view was rejected and shown to be false. Complementarianism may have a similar outcome in restricting women but its arguments are different. It has similarities to the traditional view but is not the same. The traditional view was unapologetically and openly misogynistic. Complementarianism hides its real intent (maintaining the hierarchy of men over women) while using nice sounding language like "equal with different roles". Equal in person plus not equal in authority= not equal.
Psalm 77:13 has the answer to who God desires for leadership.
An egalitarian disagrees with complimentarianiem.
Shocking.....
Well you seem to have missed the point. I have no issue with Mike being comp, the problem is when he tries to teach other people as a complementarian what egalitarians believe and gets it so wrong.
@@DivineDissident "Egalitarian" in the church is not a monolithic group so to say he "gets it wrong" is misleading.
Btw You advocate for better sources to advance a point yet reference Wikipedia.
Smh
@@The_Word_Is_The_Way youre acting as if I used Wikipedia for doctrine, its a flipping date. I used Wikipedia so that anyone can look it up as a starting point. Its not a big deal. Pretty much any egalitarian listening to Winger who knows their stuff is going to see the blatant issues with his presentation. The only reason people dont is because they arent fact checking for themselves with Mikes sources. I have a whole playlist on my channel with other egalitarians showing point by point how Mike misrepresents, twists and often states the opposite of what a scholar said. The proof is all right there for anyone to watch who is actually interested in investigating the truth for themselves. The reality is most people arent and they will just attack anyone who says something different than what they believe. Or try to find some fault so that they can dismiss them, rather than considering, “hmmm, maybe I should look and see if what she is saying is true.” Thats what a seeker of truth does. They look at the evidence and are willing to hear others out before they judge. I have a whole series as well in response to Mike, its not like my entire channel is this 60 second short.
@@DivineDissident I'm aware of what some other egalitarians said about his series, thanks. I also saw your exchange with him too. Would be an interesting debate.
please dont use wikipedia as a source it makes your evidence weak
1 Timothy 2:12, right?
Homegirl getting ratio'd in the comments. Go easy on her guys! She's definitely mistaken and her delivery could use some work but we're on the same team! Lord have mercy on us all. Love to all my egalitarian brothers and sisters, its okay, can't be right about everything!
Im curious if you'd be able to do a live one on one with Mike Winger. I went through his material and folks he referenced and went through some of your work, I don't think you're being fair or thorough enough in your responses. The question is not about when complementarianism was coined or when some council started or did something, the question is what does the Bible teach.
The series in response to Winger is not yet finished. Your question seems reasonable until you start to study history. Once you do that you start to realize how many theologians and bible translators have inserted their own opinions and ideas into theology and bible translation. It then becomes important to remove all those inserted biases and mistranslations in order to be able to understand the Bible clearly on its own, and AS A WHOLE. As far as I know Winger doesn’t do debates, and its not really my skillset.
@DivineDissident well the issue is I have studied history, especially that of the church in different regions and specifically the history of the Bible itself as it relates to translation, transmission, manuscript data, etc. The church (Eastern, Western, African, Middle Eastern before 632 AD, etc) has not had much variation on this topic surprisingly. The first major Western era where women were starting to lead in certain ways happened to be during the 1700s and the Methodist movement. John Wesley never ordained women or had women ordained, but he never spoke out against the leading of revivals or anything like that. Fast forward to the 2nd Great Awakening, the Holiness movement, and Azusa St. Revival and the advent of Pentecostalism is really where the involvement of women became more pronounced and it was largely these denominations and those that stemmed from them(Pentacostalism, Charasmatics, etc) that first started ordained women into positions of leadership within the churches.
The Bible is pretty clear and has been so from a historical perspective. The specific role of Elder/Pastor/Overseer is relegated to men. Not just any men at that, but only those who are qualified per what is set forth in the text.
@@Okielogian someone can study lots of history and still miss the history that is important to this topic. If you are interested to learn the history that Im talking about here, you can watch my full series in response to Mike featured on my youtube channel, and linked to this video.
@@Okielogian
I suggest my free essay on Deborah. Read time: 12 minutes
you wrote:
The specific role of Elder/Pastor/Overseer is relegated to men. Not just any men at that, but only those who are qualified per what is set forth in the text.
So what are the qualifications for the title/position of 'father'?
Paul believed he was a father, and that there were others. He
regarded the title/position as valid and also special.
For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers...
-excerpt 1 Corinthians 4 KJV
-words of Paul
And do not call anyone on earth your father; for only One is your Father, He who is in heaven.
-excerpt Matthew 23
-words of Jesus
Paul never states the qualifications for being a 'father'. Even though this
title/position is rare and special according to Paul. Be careful of the
teachings of Paul.
“A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;” (1 Timothy 3:2). I don't think , a woman can fill this requirement.
the "one-woman man" here is an idiom for a faithful spouse that can apply to both sexes
@@DivineDissident Uh, no indication that a woman can have a wife (especially in lieu of of Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13). Especially in light of 1 Timothy 2:12-15 on women not being allowed to teach, or usurp authority over a man.
@@brittanygreen what are you talking about? The idiom means a faithful spouse. Whether that be a wife or a husband. No one is talking about same sex marriage here. One of the most basic things about language is that speaking to an audience of men and women, the masculine is used. Its like saying “mankind” is only referring to men and women aren’t a part of “mankind”.
@@DivineDissident In lieu of the other Scripture, yes, leadership is male.
@@DivineDissident Well, deleting my response to things ...? Typical feminist thing, I guess.
This is a free country with freedom of speech. However I would love to see you debate Mike Winger. Said in Love you do come across very condescending. Mike Winger is an amazing teacher of the WORD. Why don’t you do an in-depth study like Mike Winger. Then you might have more insight. ❤
I have a whole series in response to Mike Winger. The first one is linked directly from this short. I have been studying this for years, much longer than Mike has, though length of study doesnt necessarily mean anything.
I don't understand why people, men and women don't understand what Mike Winger tought. He added nothing. Everything thing he said in the women seriers was back up with scripture and looked at it from all points of vew. Women where never down dratted, disrepected. The only thing was said scripture. Yes, women have their part. Man have theirs. Don't believe me, read your Bible. Does, God love men more then women? Never. But the fact is that God made a startment, because the woman listen to the serpent first...she was to obay her husband...unless it was going against God. Im not making this up, read the bible. But men are also told that they are to Love their wives as Christ loves the Church. Women, yes you are told to obey your huabands, but men you are told to love your wives, even to the point you would died on a cross for her.
Sadly, it sounds like you don't understand because you haven't fact checked Mike. He over and over misrepresents his authors and what they said and misrepresents what egalitarians believe and why they believe what they do. Anyone willing to read up on his sources can see this. I have whole series that covers this on my channel.
This is one of the biggest back and forths in Christianity, and nobody has a solid answer, because 1st Timothy Chapter 2 is about Paul's ministry, but it doesn't really say if every ministry should be setup exactly like his. However, people like Miriam, Deborah and Phoebe are females, and this wouldn't apply to them. Personally I believe it's up to personal interpretation. If it feels wrong to you, then don't go to any church with female pastors, but if you feel differently, it's your choice. The church is only important, because it allows you to share your beliefs with people who agree with you, and it strengthens your belief. How it's setup, or who does what isn't important, so long as you can all agree that Christ is God, and that we were all created to fulfill the role he gave us.
I agree and take no issue with people having different ideas about what Paul might have meant. But I do take issue with those who try to restrict others and accuse women of rebelling against God and telling them they need to repent for having a different view. The fact of the matter is that we dont know all the details and situation that Paul and Timothy did. We dont have all the context about what was going on with the crisis in Ephesus, and the word translated as authority “authentien” has many meanings and there are too many other ways this verse could easily be translated according to those meanings of the word. And when we start to dig into the context of the whole book, history and the culture we have even more evidence that Paul probably wasnt taking issue with women in general as teachers but rather how they were teaching or what they were teaching.
@@DivineDissident We can't exactly tell how Mike interprets the Bible, because we aren't in his head. However, he might read 1st Timothy, and see that as instruction to all ministries everywhere, forever. In chapter 2 it explicitly says that women are to remain silent in church. Like you said, we don't know the context of what that means, or why it says that, and we can only speculate what the context is behind it. It could have been that the women in Paul's ministry were loud and disruptive, but it could have been instructions for every ministry in the future. From Mike's perspective, this applies to all ministries everywhere, forever. Meaning that, if your pastor is a female, then you are going against scripture and therefore sinning, and from Mike's perspective, his purpose in saying "Women shouldn't be pastors" doesn't come from a place of bigotry. It is his attempt to make people stop sinning.
Yeah, no. This is false. What Mike singer gave was a pretty good report for both sides. You can be made in the image of God and serve different roles/purposes. I mean look at the trinity for example. Jesus role is different from that of the father, yet both are fully God. Women want to be like the man until it’s time to be the man.
Any egalitarian knows this is not the case. He did not present egalitarianism, he presented a distorted view of what he thinks we believe and misrepresented his sources left and right often claiming the opposite of what they were actually teaching. Anyone who bothers to fact check Mike can easily see how he misused his source material and misrepresented egal authors.
@@DivineDissident sorry but I got a pretty good does of what egalitarians believe at Bible college. So that doesn’t really cut it for me.
@@keithbirdwell maybe you got somewhat of an idea but that doesn’t mean its correct, depends on what bible college and their view. Egalitarianism is misunderstood all the time, plus if you dont fact check Mike you cannot possibly know how he twists his sources and misrepresents our arguments. The facts are all there, but people are not bothering to do their homework to see if what he says is accurate. It is very much not. Its why I have dedicated over a year now to making a series in response to Mike explaining what WE ACTUALLY BELIEVE and WHY and how he misrepresents
You believe women can be pastors and head the church?
The only head of the church is Jesus. But yes women can be leaders.