By Aaron Blumer Aug 04 2010 Women's IssuesFeminismGroup that demanded an apology from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood for the Danvers Satement is still waiting. 2673 reads There are 11 Comments She's kiddin' right? Susan R - Wed, 08/04/2010 - 11:30am Quote: Shirley Taylor, one of five women who signed a letter on behalf of a new Freedom for Christian Women Coalition calling on the Council to "make a public apology for the misuse of Holy Scripture as it relates to women." Taylor, a former Baptist General Convention of Texas employee who with her husband in 2009 started a website called Baptist Women for Equality, admitted that the statement she presented at the July 24 Seneca Falls 2 Evangelical Women's Rights Convention in Orlando, Fla., was "audacious." "We threw a rock at Goliath," she said. "We don't know yet whether or not we are Davids." Regardless of whether or not I agree with the Danvers Statement in its entirety, this quote sounds like it came from a teen-age drama queen. Claiming to be 'audacious' and attacking 'Goliath' with a demand for a public apology... it makes it terribly difficult to take her seriously. It also seems contradictory to throw a rock at Goliath and then suffer from an identity crisis. Scenescape Media After reading Susan R - Wed, 08/04/2010 - 1:51pm both the Danvers Statement and the http://www.bwebaptist.com/files/Apology_demanded_from_CBMBW_7-24-20102.pdf ]'apology demand' letter , I don't think Shirley Taylor actually read the Danvers Statement. Scenescape Media From the apology demand... si_sitedev - Wed, 08/04/2010 - 2:06pm Just to make it easier for those interested... This is from the apology demand letter: Quote: It is with that thought in mind that we make these statements. 1. We are concerned that men are being taught that they are god-like in their relationship to women within the church and home. As the mothers, wives, and daughters of these men, it is our concern that this doctrine is setting them up for failure as Christian fathers, husbands and sons; 2. we are concerned about the sin that evangelical church leaders commit when they deny the love of Christ fully to women simply because they were born female; 3. we are concerned about the damage this causes to families when husbands and fathers are told that they have Headship over their wives and daughters; 4. we are concerned about wife abuse, girlfriend abuse, and abuse to female children that takes place in many homes where evangelical men are taught that they have earthly and spiritual authority over women; 5. we are concerned that the children who attend churches that subscribe to the principles of The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood will grow up not knowing the full redemptive power of the blood of Jesus for both men and women; 6. we are concerned for the mental and emotional development of girls and boys who attend churches that teach males have superiority over females; 7. we are concerned that men who are taught that they have Male Headship over a home and church do not feel that they are accountable for abusive attitudes and actions towards women; 8. we are concerned about the mistranslation of the scriptures by complementarian translation committees and by the false teachings propagated by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood; 9. we are concerned that pastors who teach and preach male domination/female subordination cannot relate in a loving, Christ-like manner to female members of their congregations because they have already judged them and found them lacking; 10. we are concerned that the issue of wifely submission, promoted so heavily by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, is more about power and control than about love or obeying the Word of God. -2- It is because of these concerns that: 1. We demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood acknowledge the harm that has been done to the church body by The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, confess it as sin, and denounce it; 2. we demand that denominational leaders and all churches and seminaries which have adopted The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood do the same; 3. we demand a public apology from the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, and from all heads of seminaries and Bible colleges that have adopted The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, for the inestimable damage this statement has done to all Christians whose lives have been influenced by it; 4. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood begin to promote the Biblical design of functional equality for all Christians, both men and women; 5. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood begin to speak out against pastors who continue to demean women and oppress Christians by the use of The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood; 6. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood chastise pastors who claim that abuse of women is acceptable and justified because the wife is not submitting to the husband; 7. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood make known to every boy and every girl who attend an evangelical church, that God is their head, and that authority over another human being can come only from God; 8. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood teach men that they share equally in the burden of society’s ills, and that all that is wrong with society today cannot be blamed on women; 9. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood do everything in their power to teach seminarians to show the love of Christ to both men and women; 10. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood teach pastors to be loving towards those Christian men and women who disagree with The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood; 11. and, finally, for the sake of all Christians, men and women, we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood, make a public apology for the misuse of Holy Scripture as it relates to women, and cease to publish or promote The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood. Get a life! MShep2 - Wed, 08/04/2010 - 3:15pm Amazing. The only thing they left out was blaming "global warming" on the Danvers statement. I especially noticed points 6 and 7: Quote: 6. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood chastise pastors who claim that abuse of women is acceptable and justified because the wife is not submitting to the husband;In what church? I was raised in IFBC and have been in all kinds of very conservative churches and have never heard this taught from the pulpit. While I know this type of teaching exists to blame it on Danvers is ridiculous. Quote: 7. we demand that the Council on Biblical Manhood and Biblical Womanhood make known to every boy and every girl who attend an evangelical church, that God is their head, and that authority over another human being can come only from God;This is an example of very inconsistent thinking. People submit themselves to the police, the IRS, city, state, and federal government, and the line rules at Disneyland (etc.) but begin screaming if they are told that headship of the husband is taught in the Bible. The only thing they forgot was to ask for reparations. MS -------------------------------- Luke 17:10 They held their meeting in Orlando, FL Ted Bigelow - Wed, 08/04/2010 - 4:24pm And its is brutally hot down there in July. www.churchsonefoundation.comwww.gracecurchministry.org Where does it go? Aaron Blumer - Wed, 08/04/2010 - 9:10pm Quote: ....and that authority over another human being can come only from God; This is an interesting statement, really. Where does the authority go after after it comes from God? Maybe to where He has told us it goes in Scripture? I realize they have a different view of what "headship" means, but if authority can be given to civil government (Romans 13) over citizens, why is it so impossible that it could go to husbands over their families or elders (male) over congergations? ... and I wonder if these folks believe parents are "heads" over children? If so, wouldn't everything in this letter apply to those who teach authority over children by adults? Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me. Political correctness....................... RPittman - Thu, 08/05/2010 - 8:12am The demand for an apology is a demonstration of the arrogance of political correctness. What authority do they have to demand an apology? It's fine to disagree with someone stating your reasons but it is the height of poor taste to foster an aura of superior moral correctness and demand an apology for differing views. As it has been intimated in other posts, the Freedom for Christian Women Coalition invokes an argument for God's authority meanwhile rebelling against it in the duties and authority delegated to the husband in the headship of the family. They seemingly allude to abuse, perhaps violent and physical, through domination of women by men, which is actually a matter of power rather than authority. No one has the authority to abuse another. Authority is not necessarily synonymous with the raw power to perpetrate a forceful action. Great point Aaron Blumer - Thu, 08/05/2010 - 8:54am Quote: which is actually a matter of power rather than authority. No one has the authority to abuse another. Authority is not necessarily synonymous with the raw power to perpetrate a forceful action. This is a great point. Authority has to do with what a person has the responsibility to do as a leader. Nobody has the responsibility to abuse! So, like so much of the reasoning coming from this group, the linking of authority with abuse doesn't add up. It's even more evident if these folks believe they have authority as parents over their children... does this cause the abuse of children? In reality the authority exists as a responsibility for nurturing and training of children. Nobody is "authorized" to harm them. Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me. Evangelical Feminism at its finest... MarkClements - Thu, 08/05/2010 - 1:03pm The article reporting that they are waiting for the apology really tells all we need to know about these ladies (and a disappointing number of men) and their views. They have chosen to reinterpret Scripture to say that there are no differences in roles or relations post-Calvary. Jesus removed the penalty of sin and, therefore, all distinctions among believers. Now, anyone can be a pastor and husbands and wives share roles, etc. It's interesting that Paul wrote Ephesians and the Pastorals AFTER Galatians and he still thought that there were distinct roles (determined by gender) in the home and in the church. I guess he didn't understand it as well as they do now. Of course, it's also possible that these ladies have an agenda for which they are seeking support and that they are wresting the Scripture to give it meaning for which it was never intended. #2 and satisfied http://satisfied2nd.wordpress.com/ Further victimization Susan R - Thu, 08/05/2010 - 2:20pm We can acknowledge that interwoven into various segments of Christianity are those who use the Bible's teachings on submission and authority to manipulate, dominate, and control anyone vulnerable enough to come under their sway. But the irony is when that person escapes the dysfunctional relationship (be it husband/wife, parent/child, teacher/student, church leadership/church member or combination thereof), another kind of predator is waiting- those who appear to sympathize and empathize but are looking for their own path to power. Instead of encouraging the wounded to experience healing, comfort, forgiveness, and peace (which sometimes involves pursuing justice- I'm not ignoring that) they stoke the self-pity and bitterness with their own vehement anger. In spite of the fact that to most people they just seem loud and obnoxious, (and sometimes mentally unstable) the supposed friend or rescuer is viewed by other victims as a brave voice for their side- IOW, the hero. They then use that loyalty to further exploit those relationships for their own ends. There are women runnin' around this country with the screamin' meemies that are IMO the opposite of how Paul comforts Timothy when he's in prison- "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind." 2 Tim. 1:7 Scenescape Media Hmmm Rob Fall - Thu, 08/05/2010 - 9:25pm We demand... Whatever happened to "humbly beseech you therefore brethren?" Hoping to shed more light than heat..