I read through her entry, and decided to write a response. It was fairly lengthy, and I spent a good deal of time writing it in such a way that it got my point across without sounding needlessly abrasive or like a arrogant jerk.
She ended up deleting my response. This is the second time that this has happened to me. ;-)
The only thing that I could do is smile when I realized that she deleted my response.
Anyway, I have posted below my response to her blog entry. I felt it was right on the money.. Apparently, she didn't think so.
Thanks for the article.. Pretty insightful comments that you make..
May I offer some insights of my own?
Based on your responses to 'biblical patriarchy', I think part of your disagreement may have to do with the way that Doug Wilson and crew have stated their positions. DTM (previous commenter) above alluded to it.
It basically comes down to one's worldview, and the logical train of thought that flows from that. And I went through the link that you sent out, and I think that they didn't really emphasize this enough.
They only mentioned "worldview" once in the entire post that you linked to.
The reason that I mention this is that, there is a difference between being offended because of that person's twisting of Scriptures vs someone who is genuinely trying to be consistent with the Scriptures.
And after what I read through the patriarchy link, I would say that they are simply trying to be consistent with their understanding of husband-wife-men-women relationships as they see it in the Bible.
Even in secular societies who dont have the revealed law of God, there is still some sense of women serving their husbands, and this generally carries over into the public domain.
I have also observed noticed that one can never simply separate the public sphere from one's own personal family government.
There is always going to some sort of analogous relationship.
If you ever notice the discussions about women "having it all", there is no clear distinction of men-women-husband-wife relationships between home-life and their career...
There is some of course, but that is why I called it an analogous relationship...
Anyway, the general mentality is: "I am equal in the workplace with men, I am equal in the home-place with my husband"...
And where does this thinking come from? It comes from the secular worldview that husbands and wives are ***positionally and functionally*** equal...
The biblical worldview says that while husbands and wives are ***inherently*** equal, they are not ***positionally and functionally*** equal..
How can we so easily see the results of this worldview???
You see this all the time in TV commercials..
The American husband is viewed as a moron, while the wife is viewed as the smart, sensible, mature adult.. Look at the way that Cox (internet) recently has done their commercials or the new Eggo waffle commercial which the husband and father of the family is ridiculed.
Again, where does this come from?
It comes from the egalitarian mindset that men and women are "equal".. This mindset tells women that they are equal in the workplace, and "equal" at home, when in fact it is actually the opposite (if you are treating your husband as a moron).
The secular mindset tells women that they are in fact superior to men, and their husbands..
(You also see this with the recent statements by women congressmen saying that if they were in office at the time, they would have come up with a better budget deal.. Why???? Simply because they are women!)
TV commercials are simply a reflection of that secular worldview. This understanding of "equality" between men and women is related to the understanding of "equality" of husbands and wives..
They are not mutually exclusive as the TV commercials make clear the evidence of this "egalitarian" worldview applied at home...
Moreover, it is odd to see that the secular worldview of husband-wife-men-women relations makes no attempt to "bifurcate" home life and work life, yet you demand that the Christian world view be done in this way. This would make your application of your Christian worldview inconsistent while the seculars apply their worldview with consistency (at least on this particular issue) with devastating consequences to the family order...
The point that I am trying to make is that Wilson and crew are trying to be consistent with their worldview, and trying to be consistent with how that worldview extends towards society in general.
I do agree with you that application is definitely hard... But I would encourage you to look at it from their angle. Their underlying motivation isn't to try to offend women or "put them in their place".. They are simply trying to be consistent with the principles that they understand in the Bible.. Even if you don't agree with them, you should try to address their worldview understanding instead of saying that they are wrong simply because you feel offended...
When you disagree, you offer up no Scriptural or exegetical argument as to why their points are wrong. You simply assert it by saying that "Scripture doesn't teach that", and then move on to quote someone. While quoting someone has value, it is more beneficial if you could offer up some biblically analyzed reasons for why you think that they are wrong, and not simply quoting someone who agrees with you.
You also quote various history, which provides good context, but the history that you quote never actually address their line of reasoning..
Simply because, say, Victorian culture coincides with some aspect with Christianity (or Doug Wilson's understanding of it) this doesn't actually prove your point.
Mormons pray to "God".. Christians pray to God.. Does that mean that prayer is wrong?
And, arguments from silence are not proper arguments to use as to why you disagree with someone. Scripture doesnt address masturbation at all.. But, we know that it is wrong because of our worldview on sexual purity..
And you wont ever see me quoting some historical aspect or sociological aspect or medical aspect as to the "health" benefits of masturbation as reasons why it is morally permissible.
For me, I think that it is demeaning for a woman to think that she is in a lower position because she doesnt have a job that pays 6 figures, while her husband does.. She has a role that God gave her as a wife and mother, and that is is something to be honored, not looked down upon.
Finally, what I am NOT saying is that women can never hold jobs or something like that... "All things are lawful"..
But, what I am saying is that how does one's actions and thoughts reconcile with the Biblical worldview of 'patriarchy'?
I really did enjoy reading your post, and I wanted to share my thoughts with you.. and I do appreciate your thoughts.. There is more that I can say, but, i think that this will suffice for now..
Thank you.. Keep thinking and writing!!!!!