By Jocelyn Anderson
It is an unarguable fact that humans need and want boundaries, so it should come as no surprise that as Biblical Christianity declines, being replaced by a predominantly soft-on-doctrine-don’t-be-judgmental approach, the need for boundaries and structure within the Christian community becomes painfully evident.
How convenient for hierarchalists, as this type of Christianity leaves little use for the Lordship of Christ, the guidance of His Holy Spirit, or the assurance of His Written Word.
“Can Christian Women Gone Wild Save Us From New Calvinism?” “……to Phil Johnson’s point, how dare that woomun call out a man of “Piper’s stature” (did he really say that? Let me check again.Yep, he sure did). Well, that pretty much says it all—if one of the who’s who of the evangelical world teaches error, the uneducated book-buying peasants of American church culture need to keep their mouths shut and submit to the “ruling elders.” Worse yet, if not unthinkable, is the idea that one of the woomun peasants would speak out!”
*****RESEARCH ARTICLES INDEX: AGAINST ETERNAL SUBORDINATION OF THE SON THEOLOGY (ESS)*****
EXCERPT FROM STUDY~ WHY THIS IS ESSENTIAL TO STUDY!!
In patriocentric circles, the most widely held and common belief is that of husbands sanctifying their wives or in some way governing or participating in the sanctification of their wives. The first part of the statement indicates that this is a one-to-one relationship or parallel between the work of Christ and the work of husbands in the lives of their wives. The second half of the statement that the husbands should long and work and love and pray for his wife’s spiritual growth, but this is entirely different from what is implied by equating the husband’s role with working to somehow make his wife “holy and without blemish” as Christ does for the church. Bruce Ware does apply this as applicable not only to Christ’s sanctifying of the church but also relates this as the serious responsibility of a husband towards his wife, does he not? Somehow it is the husband’s dutyto affect this for his own wife as if it is within man’s capabilities to render his wife holy and without spot or blemish! How can a man render his wife holy when man himself lacks the ability to make even himself the least bit holy? Unless he denies that this is his meaning. What then is the meaning of the first part of that statement concerning Ephesians 5:27?
Certainly a man should long for his wife’s spiritual growth, loving and praying for her, but how does another human being “work” towards this end, affecting something that only Christ can do? Only Christ can make us holy through His Blood and only He can cleanse us from our maculae and stains, presenting us holy and blameless before the Father. Man does not act as intercessor for his wife, and that is not what the Word teaches. But, as Bruce Ware states other places, if woman is the indirect image of God because Eve, the first woman, was taken from Adam’s substance, and she is thus rendered as of a lesser essence either physically or metaphysically (ontologically), then it gives reason that a greater creature could render this care of making one holy. If woman realizes her being and calling only through man and her husband is her intercessor before Christ, than this idea that husband sanctifies his wife is reasonable.
Filed under: Patriarchy Movement Tagged: | biblical gender roles, Biblical Patriarchy, Bruce Ware, caste system, CBMW, church authority, ESS, Hierarchalists, new calvinism, patriocentic church, priest craft, submission doctrine, Vision Forum