Best Complementarian argument (Women in Ministry Part 5): With Dr. Colin Smothers (2019) 

Also there's some translations that view the "out of his side" not meaning rib, but the character or personality of Adam, which I find fascinating and makes a lot of sense. As men and women complete one another in so many ways with respect to personality and capabilities.

I would have liked to hear him explain further his view of what a 'husband laying down his life for his wife' looks like. He seemed to be using the term interchangably with 'caring' about her, which seems like a wishy washy abdication of responsibility. In the mean time, what seems to be the practical reality in many complementarian marriages is that the woman is the one laying down her life for her husband. All her youthful dreams and plans for her life, including any call from God, get laid down in order to serve her husband's call and dreams. So she ends up not only submitting to her husband but also laying down her life for him, while the husband gets to have his cake and eat it.

Let me start by saying I thought this was an excellent conversation, very insightful. And I'm still not sure exactly where I land, but I definitely lean complimentarian. However I think it's really important to specify that in Genesis 3, God only specifically curses the serpent (3:14) and the ground (3:17). There were additional punishments for Adam and Eve, but they themselves were not cursed. This is important because the idea that woman's body has been cursed by God has created a negative narrative that women have about themselves - that their bodies are working against them in every way. However, we have still been fearfully and wonderfully made by our Creator. And yes, while childbirth is painful and other things are not so fun, women are still very thoughtfully equipped and designed to do these things. Everything has been meticulously designed to function the way it does, studying health and the human body has made it ever more clear to me what an amazing Creator God is. So I believe we (women in particular) should be shifting to a more positive narrative concerning this issue, and it starts by using the right language surrounding Genesis 3.

Can someone explain what he's trying to say regarding being saved through child bearing? Is he saying embracing your femininity and having children is required for salvation? I've never heard a comp explanation for that verse and I don't understand what he's trying to say...

Appreciate the civil discussion and the fact that both sides are represented in this series. There seems to be a great deal of assumptions made on what exactly the Genesis story is meant to teach. The Western tendency to ‘go granular’ and isolate ‘universal’ truth statements while ignoring context is at play here.

I feel like alot of his arguments were strong but I felt there were some leaps in logic in regards to terminology. I wish he went deeper into the hebrew and greek when referencing different verses in the bible. There is so much poetry in Genesis. I feel when he spoke about this verse it was a bit of a stretch: GEN 3:16 To the woman he said, “I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; with painful labor you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” I think here it is very clear that adams rule over eve and her desire for her husband was part of the curse. At the very least it shows the aspect of mutual submission that was part of the pre fall relationship. I'm still not sure where I stand yet. I feel like I'm a 1. comp but still researching and trying to figure out for myself. From Adam and Eve's example I would definitely say that in the home the man definitely has headship but as adam and eve both had dominion in the world around them, I would say that reflects how we are both leaders and the light in the world.

As an anthropologist and a New Testament reader, I wonder how the compelemarians emphasize the "created order" rather than the "new creation" order. Have they forgotten the declaration of the New Testament of "anyone in Christ is new creation" and life in church is supposed to represent that. I mean all such arguments on the creation order seem to deny the new order. Marriage is part of the creation order so principles apply there. In the creation order there is Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female but in the new creation such distinctions are no longer in Christ. Christians live in between the times so culture applies, as it does in this world, so in some cultures women ought not be prominent but not by a new creation complementary principle. Understanding this leads to errors on both sides. Principles can also emerge from cultures as if they are natural. As a Christian I'd say it comes down to how you view the "church". AT NO TIME DOES HE MENTION the NEW CREATION... That ought to alert anyone!!

I find it curious that he did not finish reading ICor 11. Verse 11 -12 adds that even though the head or source of their glory comes from two different locations, “in the Lord” they have an egalitarian relationship.

Complimentarian argument for me won the day on the back of this argument well done and well articulated 👏🏾

All this talk about "headship" makes me think about a specific verse that is being glossed over. “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” Gen 3:15 KJV Jesus squashed this debate when He came ministering to both men and women. When did he teach that the man is the head of the wife? Jesus taught that the two were designed to become one flesh... ONE! If we are to be viewed as ONE, it wouldn't matter if I preached the word or my husband preached it so long as we are joined in a godly way. After the fall, we were given hope in the Tree of Life, which is literally referred to as a "she" in the book of Revelation, btw. The way I see it, an individual is married to God when they are born again! Since the Spirit cannot literally speak, you are to be His voice as Jesus commanded his apostles to spread the gospel to every creature. Every believer has a voice in the body of Christ. It is wrong to muzzle up half the body. I believe Paul wrote what he wrote for the times they lived in. Remember, all they had then was the first half of the Bible and not everyone was familiar with it. Most women, essentially, had to "catch up" academically as it was less common for women to study scripture back then than it is today. It was the chaos in the body of Christ that he was trying to nip in the bud. Chaos still exists in some churches today, because some people do not live by EVERY word, but instead take a few verses and build entire churches with strange doctrine. "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matt 4:4 KJV

Why are there only men here taking about women in ministry?

This was the most Biblically sound argument throughout this entire series. It used Scripture to interpret Scripture, which is what we should always appeal to first. We need not look to historical/cultural practices when reasons that clearly negate and transcend those are given. (Referring back to the creation order is given multiple times in the NT in regards to this topic). The previous episode on egalitarianism was very ‘feeling’ driven and gave more weight to the culture than the very Word of God. Prophetic words were also used to inform decisions, which can be a good thing, but *not* when they contradict the Word of God. Great dialogue on such an important issue. God Bless.

Of course theres a created order. Doesnt mean she cant be a pastor, apostle, 5 fold ministry.

Can we not also conclude that when Jesus Christ died on the cross and took upon Himself the curse of sin and became the propitiation for our sin, that we are now free from the curse of sin and death? Therefore if we are free from the curse of sin and death through Christ Jesus, when we are in Christ Jesus are we not completely set free from the curse in Genesis 2?

Brah, change that thumbnail, looks creepy, especially with the topic. LOL Great content!

As a Christian woman, my eyes have been open to a new perspective - thank you for the series - much enjoyed and I learned a lot.

I have been following this series intently and have changed my views from 1 point Comp to egalitarian. It was this video (actually podcast) that solidified my views. I found Dr. Smothers' argument strong but not as compelling as Dr. Keener's. Anyway, through the whole series, I had this song flowing in the back of my head. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-VMqGfI9DRMA.html

Silencing Women and Not Empowering Women in Christian Ministry and Church Leadership (including Ordination of Pastors) is also rebellion against the Scripture and against God who equally called them to the Ministry.

Just a thought here. Titus 2:3-5 states: "Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored." This verse says nothing about the older women teaching the younger women Scripture or doctrine. Also, if we take this verse literally to mean that this is to be true for all time for all women then they can't work outside the home because this verse instructs the older women are to train the younger women to be "workers at home."

In a lot of Paul's teaching he uses the first person singular " I ". In 1 Timothy, ch 2 V 12 he says " But I suffer not a woman to teach -------- " , he does not say God or Jesus suffer not a woman to teach .

Little off topic but something to think about, could Adam and Eve sin prior to eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil? My opinion is that they couldn't in the context they weren't culpable until they ate. I brought this up because sometimes you here something like from John Piper, from whence does sin come...because I believe he claims Adam sinned before he ate.

if your argument is that we are equal but different and also that as women we represent the Church and men represent Christ, then how are women equal to Christ? Genesis 1's account of creation, Adam represents mankind. Genesis 2 is a breakdown of Genesis 1. It was God who said it was not good. Not Adam, who made a request for a helper.

Let me say first how much I appreciate your genuine desire to seek both truth and understanding between parties on this issue. The complementarian case just doesn't add up for me and elements of it are very concerning regarding potential abuse of power. I acknowledge that the CBMW does not endorse abuse of power in any way, shape or form, but I believe a strong case can be made for their teachings resulting in the opposite of what they hope for. The idea that the woman's "desire" in Genesis 3:16 is actually a desire to control or be contrary to her husband is a disturbing and unjustified interpretation in my view. The only justification is the same words used in Genesis 4:7 and, unless we're willing to view woman as the embodiment of sin seeking to corrupt man, I don't see how this is reasonable. Some have, indeed, followed this interpretation to its logical conclusion and treated woman as an evil, corrupting influence that must be subdued and controlled by man. This may sound irrational but think about it. If a man believes that his wife's desire is to control or be contrary to him, what attitude will that lead to in situations of conflict? He will feel justified in "putting his foot down" and having his own way, because fundamentally she just wants to control him. This doesn't promote unity. True unity is when hearts are aligned in purpose and in truth, not when one is obliged to yield to the other because they hold a lower rank. Jesus' relationship to God is not comparable because they WERE unified in purpose and truth. So how do we reach unity? Discussion, prayer, study, seeking to understand one another's point of view. All of the really hard stuff. It's so much easier for men if they can feel justified in avoiding all this hard work (potentially finding out they're wrong) and just do what they want. And if there is disunity after the husband has his own way then it's the wife's fault for not being at peace with being ignored or dismissed. We are exhorted to become one with our spouse. Expecting the wife to yield to her husband in everything doesn't make them one, it simply erases her. The other point I want to address is the idea that supreme authority is synonymous with "headship". The husband has responsibilities towards his wife, undoubtedly, but I question whether that necessitates authority over his wife. What do we even mean when we talk about authority? Do we mean that a husband has the right to punish his wife if she is not obedient? I have never seen any Scriptural support for this and yet our ideas of authority in every other relationship seem to necessitate the right to enforce in some way. Whenever wifely submission is encouraged/commanded in Scripture the author is speaking to the wife. Nowhere is the husband given the authority to enforce submission. It is voluntary. Which begs the next question. When is the wife justified in not submitting? Her husband requiring disobedience to God is a no brainer, but what counts as disobedience to God? Many would argue that even if her husband is in sin the wife should submit to his authority, but isn't that enabling his sin? As brothers and sisters in Christ we are to hold one another accountable. That includes a wife holding her husband accountable (vice versa being presumed). The idea that a wife cannot hold her husband accountable for his sin destroys any notion of the husband and wife being equal. It is worth noting that Jesus never forced anyone to follow him. He corrected and rebuked, most certainly, but he never forced anyone. There is much to say on this subject but perhaps the biggest question is, for what reason is male authority, practically speaking, necessary within marriage? When would it ever be necessary for a husband to exercise authority, that is, compel his wife to submit to him? His primary responsibility is to model love and servanthood. You don't need authority over someone in order to do that. In practice it seems as though male authority in marriage is actually a disincentive for the husband to carry out his God-given responsibilities to his wife. I have been watching this series in order so I'm interested to see any of these issues are addressed in later episodes.

As a woman, trusting God’s design is best…whatever role He creates for me, I want to walk that out well with His help… all the while not straining for my own glory

Adam was not the first to name Eve, God named her woman after he created her. Adam renamed her Eve after the fall. Gen 2::22 God is already calling her woman. Adam in Gen 2:23 is just declaring that fact.

Since Paul uses anthropomorphic terms in Eph 5, what type of relationship does a human head have with a human body? Is it a egalitarian or complementarian relationship?

And I understanding him correctly at 55:12 that he is saying that by submitting to God's created order that's how a woman receives salvation? Are you indicating that this is no longer a secondary or tertiary issue but now a primary condition of salvation? Because that seems bonkers. Yet that's what he said

Could it be that because Adam was not only given the instruction of the forbidden fruit, but also because he was the seed barrier, meaning he carried all of humanity within his loins, is why he was held solely responsible for the fall of man?

There are varying views on how to interpret the creation order of male and female. This school of thought understands that God created a hierarchical relationship between the genders at creation but I do not see that. Adam's response to the woman's creation reveals that the man sees the woman equal to her. Together they were mandated to rule and subdue, be fruitful, and multiply. This changed after their transgression as a consequence of their corrupted hearts. The intimacy between the two was broken and man stop seeing the woman as bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, which is how to defend himself he was able to throw her under the bus so easily. What is pronounced in 3:16-17 already started taking place in the previous verses. God simply gives voice to the changes that have taken place because of their rebellion and corrupted hearts. The woman's desire will now be contrary to the man's creating conflict in their relationship which will cause the increased pain or grief God said she and he will experience going forward. God did not curse the man and woman and it could be said they were punished and in a sense they were but God never incresed the pain of women's childbirth. This passage according to Hebrew scholars like Iain Provan, Gordon Wenham, and Tim Mackie has been misinterpreted in most English translations. The misinterpretations have led to the development of the complementarian school of thought. The only way to escape those dynamics brought about by the corruption of men's hearts is to be in Christ and surrendered to the Holy Spirit. I am no feminist and I don't care about the culture with regards to Bible interpretation. I believe women are equal in God's eyes based on biblical interpretation.

I believe woman are under man. Its so obivious we need to own it!!! This working woman business is aweful especial when raising children is so more important.

The whole OT is a disaster for male privilege and female subservience. (Except Abigail who disobeyed her husband -thank God for her.) Then Jesus. Praise God I’m saved even as a woman. Thank God naming man and woman happened after the fall. It is time to change the equality verbiage to curb rape in the church. Men and women though different are equally saved by Jesus and it’s time to stop treating women so different that Jesus doesn’t look powerful enough to save and to give women gifts equally in the church. Let’s follow Jesus on all the Genders he saved and used to save others. Fontina is the name of the samaritan woman at the well and she was equal to the apostles and became a martyr according to Greek Orthodox historical records...but her story wasn’t written as a book? Why? Perhaps, Rev. 22-18-19 is legit.