A Quiet Simple Life | Sallie Borrink

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 6:23

A Quiet Simple Life

You are here: Home / Archives for Biblical Truth & Discernment / Examining Biblical Theology

Examining Biblical Theology

The Meaning of I Timothy 2:9-15 | Wade Burleson


The restrictions put on women’s functioning in the church by complementarians generally come down to a few key verses. As I’ve written before, most people read the entirety of the Scriptures through the complementarian filter of those few verses.  Because they believe those verses must be true as they are literally read, they dismiss anything else that doesn’t fit. Nowhere is this more apparent than with 1 Timothy 2:9-15.

The Meaning of I Timothy 2:9-15

Last Friday Wade Burleson posted what may be the best layperson overview of the culture surrounding 1 Timothy 2:9-15 I have ever read anywhere.

If you don’t remember exactly what is says, here it is in the NIV.

I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.

We simply cannot understand what this passage means if we ignore the context and history connected to it.

Understanding I Timothy 2:9-15

Understanding the context and history is not looking for excuses to believe whatever we want. It is reading the passage in the way it was intended.

In Artemis and the End of Us: Evangelical Errors Regarding Women, Wade writes:

Until you understand the problem Timothy faced (the man to whom the words in I Timothy 2:9-15 are written), and until you are familiar with Ephesus (the place where Timothy lived), and until you have a working knowledge of the Amazons (the warrior women that the ancient Greeks believed founded Ephesus), and until you comprehend the influence of the cult of Artemis and the Temple of Artemis which was in Ephesus, the meaning of the Apostle Paul’s words will never be rightly understood. F. F. Bruce once wrote, “Subjugation of a woman is a system of man’s fallen nature. If the work of Christ involves… breaking the fall, then the implication of His work for the liberation of women is plain.” Jesus Christ came to liberate subjugated women. The cultism in evangelicalism regarding women’s behaviors will only be broken when people lay aside stupid, false obedience to I Timothy 2:9-14 and realize the meaning of Paul’s words to Timothy.

I challenge every person reading this to prayerfully read Wade’s entire post and thoughtfully consider what he wrote. It is not for the theologically squeamish. But you should investigate for yourself the truth behind his words. You should investigate the truth for those you influence through your writing, your blogging, your parenting, your volunteering, etc. If you are understanding these verses incorrectly, wouldn’t you want to know? Wouldn’t you want those you are influencing to know?

It breaks my heart to know that there are gifted women reading this today (and men married to gifted women) who are silenced to varying degrees because of a flat out wrong understanding of this passage.

It grieves me that women will one day stand before the Lord and realize they missed out on so many opportunities to serve Him and witness for Him through the power of the Holy Spirit because they were convinced by others that they must be silent. Christians in this country lament the lives lost tragically due to abortion and rightly so. Should we not also mourn the lost spiritual life in the church due to incorrect teachings of Scripture? I do daily as I think of the gifted women I know in my own life who have been silenced and stripped of the ability to use their gifts given by the Holy Spirit.

Category: Tag: 5 Comments

Should Women Say The Lord’s Prayer in Church?


Dee and Deb over at The Wartburg Watch are discussing the infamous list by Wayne Gruden that we’ve discussed before: But What Should Women Do In the Church?

In their post, Wayne Grudem: 83 Biblical Rules for Gospel Women, a commenter named “Looking for You” posted the following.

Ha. Well, in the patriarchal church I attended for almost ten years, women were “allowed” to do exactly one item on these lists: Sing hymns with the congregation. They used to do hymns where the women would sing one verse and the men another until someone complained about it, then that stopped. Women could not make announcements, they could not offer prayer requests, there was no sunday school to teach so that was not an issue, they could not have women’s bible studies at all or even attend the men’s study, they could not hold a job at all unless it was from within the home. They even stopped saying The Lord’s Prayer as a congregation because that would allow for the women to pray aloud in public. Women were not to discuss theology even at meals after church or at church functions because a man might overhear her and learn something from her, and she would have then usurped authority by teaching him something. I once overheard a woman apologize to a man for becoming “too animated” in conversation with him. Another time I was watching a baby boy swatting at a baby girl, who was being very patient about it, and one of the mothers said “She’s going to make a good submissive wife someday.” Uggggggghhhhhh!!!

So anyway, upon comparing my experience in patriarchy with this complementarian list, I have to conclude that patriarchy and complementarianism really are quite different – but only in degree.The principle is exactly the same, I just think that complementarians are very, very inconsistent about applying the principle. Honestly, I think the complimentarians are into the arbitrary drawing of lines, which is confusing and can be downright scary. This is why they cannot define anything, ever. What the patriarchalists have going for them is the ability to define with confidence, because they are consistent.

The issue is that the entire principle upon which both comps and pats base their rules is dead wrong. I am not sure which is worse: arbitrary, confusing rules based on a wrong principle where you never know quite what to expect (complementarianism), or a wrong principle consistently applied to go all the way to the furthest extremes where you know exactly what to expect (patriarchy).

GREAT COMMENT. I agree. This is gold.

I am not sure which is worse: arbitrary, confusing rules based on a wrong principle where you never know quite what to expect (complementarianism), or a wrong principle consistently applied to go all the way to the furthest extremes where you know exactly what to expect (patriarchy).

I have often said to David that at least the patriachalists that don’t allow a woman to speak at all in church are consistent. I completely disagree with them and I think it is really not that difficult to make a case for why they are completely wrong. But the complementarian inconsistency is a huge problem. Read my post The Complementarian Position is Often Not Lived Out Consistently, Even by Ardent Followers in which I share a great story from Wade Burleson that illustrates this very point.

But some will say, Sallie, that isn’t complementarianism. Of course women should say The Lord’s Prayer in church. And I would ask… Why? If Christian writers and pastors like John Piper and Tim Challies think women shouldn’t read the Scriptures in church or lead the congregation in prayer in church, isn’t it just a tiny little step to decide they really shouldn’t be reciting The Lord’s Prayer out loud either? If you are going to be truly consistent with women being silent in church then what other conclusion is there?

Category: Tag:  | 11 Comments

Christian Premarital Counseling That Promotes the Idea of an Adversarial Marriage


Have you ever stopped to ponder that in many Christian circles men and women are told in premarital counseling that they are entering an adversarial relationship? They are. It is very common and I believe it causes many problems down the road.

In Christian premarital counseling, a woman is instructed that part of the curse is that she will want to usurp her husband’s authority. She is told she will instinctively want to take over and that’s just wrong if she wants to be a godly wife who pleases God and her husband. She must be very careful to not overstep her bounds and infringe on the man’s leadership. She must submit in all things. Because she is a wicked woman bearing the curse of Eve, she must expect that she will be a usurper. She won’t be able to help herself.

The man is told his wife will try to “take over” and dominate him. He has to be on his guard that he doesn’t abdicate his leadership or let his wife lead. He must be vigilant that he’s in charge and she is properly submitting. If she isn’t submitting, it is his job to make sure she does. She is, in one sense, his potential enemy. The man must always be aware that his wife, his adversary, will be instinctively trying to take his place because women basically can’t help themselves.

So we see a woman going into marriage who has been made thoroughly afraid that she will try to take over. And we have a man going into marriage who has been told his wife is his adversary and that she’ll try to take over his role.

Is there any other relationship in the Bible where believers are told to expect to become adversaries? Even more than that, they are encouraged that this adversarial relationship is proof of biblical teaching.

Would you join a church that promoted adversarial relationships among its members? Of course not! We are called to live at peace with one another, encourage one another, build each other up, serve each other, etc.

Why in the world do we tell engaged couples that they can expect to be adversaries?

How can this possibly be promoted as biblical?

Category: 7 Comments

Defining Complementarian and Egalitarian on a Spectrum


The terms complementarian and egalitarian are used all the time, but they are’t two simple terms. There can be quite a lot of nuance for each one. For example, what someone might mean when they identify as one or the other may not be at all what the other person envisions. So it’s interesting to consider what kind of complementarian or egalitarian you might be.

Complementarian and Egalitarian Spectrum

Adrian Warnock’s suggested his own overview of the full spectrum of complementarianism and egalitarianism. He breaks them down into:

  • Patriarchy
  • Strong Complementarian
  • Moderate Complementarian
  • Soft Complementarian
  • Moderate Egalitarian
  • Strong Egalitarian
  • Extreme Feminist

I agree with his summaries for the most part. I think he’s a little more generous with the complementarian views in terms of couching them in more positive terms than he is with the egalitarian views. But, overall, I do agree with his breakdown as a helpful point of reference for discussion.

The Perceived Value of Men by Feminists

His definition of Extreme Feminist is interesting, especially the idea that Extreme Feminists basically devalue men. I think he is right that only the Extreme Feminists devalue men. I’ve yet to meet any Christian Egalitarian of any kind who doesn’t fully appreciate and see the value of both men and women.

Christian Egalitarianism by its very definition rejoices in the importance of both men and women.

Feminism in the Church

Now, in light of his breakdown and after considering where you and others you know might fall on the spectrum, consider this conversation from 2006 entitled “Feminism in Your Church” with

  • Mark Dever (The Gospel Coalition)
  • CJ Mahaney (Sovereign Grace Ministries)
  • Russell Moore (Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary)
  • Randy Stinson (President of Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood)

If you listen to the first five or ten minutes you will get the general gist of their views.

Perhaps most striking to me is that in their minds Egalitarianism = Feminism.

And they sum up Feminism in one word – wrong.

One of them thinks Feminism started in the 1960’s and another one thinks it started in the Garden. They never really say which it is.

So according to them, feminism started sometime in the past 50 years (give or take 6,000 years). In their discussion of Feminism, Feminism is just wrong, wrong, wrong and a literal threat to the Gospel. It is a Gospel issue.

Even more striking, consider that they believe most people in the church are feminists and don’t realize it. And most people in the church are even in same-sex marriages and don’t even know that! Did you know you are in a same-sex marriage? I bet a lot of you are!  This is what they said:

Why is this topic important?

Because most of the people in their churches are feminists and most of the people in our churches are in same-sex marriages right now, they just don’t just realize it. Because you have people who have marriages in which you do not have male headship, in which you do not have male protection, and you do not have provision for wives and so this is not a theoretical issue, this is something that is a gospel issue.

That’s why Paul says a man who does not provide for his family is worse than an infidel. . . .

. . . There are gospel implications for wives taking their children to day care in the morning and picking them up in the afternoon.

Yes, if you are a working woman or take your children to daycare or live in a home where the man isn’t in charge the way these men think he should be, YOU are in a same-sex marriage. 

Seriously. Listen to it for yourself. It is in the first ten minutes.

Complementarianism Definition

Is this your definition of complementarianism?

Do you think couples who are basically not patriarchal are in a same-sex marriage? 

That’s what these men said in 2006 and not one of them said that was an inappropriate statement. They all let it go right into the discussion. This discussion is still up and available on their website six years later. It’s not like I had to use the Wayback Machine to dig it up.

These are the men defining complementarianism today. These are the men training pastors, writing books, speaking at conferences, and teaching a huge audience via the internet.

So unless you are a hardline patriarchalist, tonight when you go to bed you can tell your spouse the good news you discovered today. You are in a same-sex marriage!

Category: Tag: 7 Comments