... "why don't you leave this issue of complementarianism at the level of baptism or church polity? Surely you cooperate with those who disagree with you on such matters." Because, though I could be wrong, it is my best and most sober judgment that this position is effectively an undermining of--a breach in--the authority of Scripture. As Lig the paedo-baptist has often said "If there were a verse in I Timothy saying 'I do not permit an infant to be baptized . . .' we wouldn't be having this conversation about baptism! There is such a verse about women serving as teacher/elders!"Read his whole post here.
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Complimentarianism
Mark Dever writes a post on complimentarianism, defined at wikipedia.org as "a view of the relationship between the genders that differs from gender equalism, in that it believes that both men and women are equal in status, but can have different and complementary roles." Dever describes it this way: "there are gender roles in home & church that are culturally expressed, but some gender roles are actually rooted in and mandated by Scripture." The following excerpt really stuck out to me:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
This is a great piece by Dever. It's basically that complimentarianism is a core gospel issue...that's why they take a stand on it cross-denominationally. Whether you believe in complimentarianism or not shows your approach to the authority or inerrancy of the Word.
Homosexuality could be approached in a similar way.
Your stance on these issues (if developed biblically) will show your commitment to the infallibility of the Bible!
In Christ
Noah
Post a Comment