Biblical Manhood Question

Discussion in 'Theological Forum' started by Rutherglen1794, Jul 16, 2019.

  1. Rutherglen1794

    Rutherglen1794 Puritan Board Sophomore

    Hello,

    I noticed somewhere recently that some people believe that Complementarianism is not truly biblical, but that Patriarchy should be used in its place. (And obviously Egalitarianism is junk.)

    Has anyone come across anything comparing and contrasting Patriarchy with Complementarianism?

    I do not think it was meant in a Vision Forum kind of way. It was not tied to that movement.

    I am intrigued, but want to learn more.

    Edit: Here are some articles that are generally about this topic.

    https://itsgoodtobeaman.com/servant-leadership-transforms-leadership-into-subservience/

    https://itsgoodtobeaman.com/who-do-we-think-we-are/
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2019
  2. Taylor Sexton

    Taylor Sexton Puritan Board Junior

    I do not know any literature, but as I have encountered the position you describe in the OP, it seems that they argue that modern "complementarianism," with it's talk of things like "servant" leadership, is in practice simply egalitarianism masked by biblical headship language to pacify the men, leaving the women, who in the end are the ones whose pleasure, needs and whim must be sought, remain ultimately in charge. The position you describe, as I understand it, says that, no, men are the heads of their households and rulers in the church—full stop; they are not servants, but pure, proper and unqualified heads and leaders.

    Of course, I could be wrong. (EDIT: I posted this before you edited your post to include those two links. It appears the first link confirms to some degree what I said above.) Still, perhaps someone here has a better understanding and could even suggest some literature.
     
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2019
  3. Rutherglen1794

    Rutherglen1794 Puritan Board Sophomore

    This position would then seem correct, would it not?
     
  4. Taylor Sexton

    Taylor Sexton Puritan Board Junior

    I frankly don't really have an opinion on it at the moment; I haven't studied it near enough. I general, I am very careful about aligning myself with movements like these with a mere "yes" or "no," as they are often so fraught with radicals who, since they get the most press, are what most people perceive as being normative for the beliefs of the group. And, more often than not, if I do happen to align myself with such a group, I end up having to qualify it so much that alignment proves to be more of a hindrance than a helpful label.
     
  5. Rutherglen1794

    Rutherglen1794 Puritan Board Sophomore

    Indeed. Makes sense.

    This thread ain’t getting to 13 pages, that’s for sure!
     
  6. Timmay

    Timmay Puritan Board Freshman

    I’ve come across this too and have even seen the concept of the man as federal head of the family as the reason why women should not vote/reason why historically women did not vote until first wave feminism. That’s something I want to look into historically because that’s explicitly a theological argument as opposed to a social ‘oppression’ argument. And I wonder if it has merit.

    Otherwise some of these guys are def “get in the kitchen and make me a sandwich” while others will work two jobs so their wife can stay home and raise the kids and not work.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  7. Pergamum

    Pergamum Ordinary Guy (TM)

    I think the 3 positions (egalitarianism, complementarianism, patriarchy) are becoming more and more useless as people keep redefining them (and reacting to them). Also, 150 years ago, nobody would have even heard of these positions because it was clear what the status of husband and wife was in society. These 3 positions being defined are a result of what has been happening over the last century in the West.
     
  8. Pergamum

    Pergamum Ordinary Guy (TM)

    Many men in churches nowadays would lead....if only their wife told them to.
     
    • Funny Funny x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  9. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I see both sides in the current discussion as a dialectic feeding off each other. Complementarians are getting hijacked by Evangelical feminists. The patriarchalists, as a result, are overreacting. Let's put it this way: Doug Wilson is the moderate one in the patriarchalist group. It's more along the lines of "Ungus make woman breed and cook."

    When patriarchalist groups refuse to condemn the Pearls' theology and openly promote avowed Pelagians like the Transformed Wife (Lori), then there is a problem.

    Of course, I can't align myself with the Complementarians because they are mostly suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome.
     
  10. VictorBravo

    VictorBravo Administrator Staff Member

    I'm thankful for your ability to make me laugh, Jacob.

    That and to keep me up to date on the latest social trends.

    I have deliberately stayed away from keeping up with all this over the past few years--too much mucking around in my own world to really relish others mucking things up. Maybe if we moved away from all the political baggage and just acknowledged that "Ungus saw Margaret and knew that she was a fit", and then they lived happily ever after doing whatever it was God set out for them to do.

    Maybe my take on Genesis is a little simplistic, but at least I can sleep without worrying about my identity.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Amen Amen x 1
    • List
  11. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    True, it was funny, but I really wasn't exaggerating.
     
  12. Pergamum

    Pergamum Ordinary Guy (TM)

    It is hard for most hipster Calvinists in 2019 to write about manhood when they aren't even manly.
     
  13. Rutherglen1794

    Rutherglen1794 Puritan Board Sophomore

    Amen. Do you know of any robust, solid books about manhood?
     
  14. C. M. Sheffield

    C. M. Sheffield Puritan Board Junior

    I often encounter unbiblical ways of thinking about male leadership in the home. For instance, a husband and wife will discuss some matter and will ultimately not be able to agree. When the husband makes the call, the wife will complain that his moving forward when they were not both in agreement amounts to him having a sinful disregard for her opinions and feelings. "Repentance" in such a situation involves the husband resolving to show more "respect" to his wife's perspective and then just going along with her plan. So she must only "submit" to her husband when she thinks he's right. If he's wrong, she may disregard his authority until he comes around to her way of thinking, at which point she will "submit" again to his "leadership."
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2019
  15. Rutherglen1794

    Rutherglen1794 Puritan Board Sophomore

    We really ought to praise God for anything in our wives that isn't like the women of this world and age.
     
  16. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    We might not need to make the issue harder than it is. Guys like Kostenberger and others have written well on the family. And if you can bracket Grudem's erroneous views on the Trinity, he is okay at points.

    As long as you avoid Wilson and his cultic disciples, you should be fine.
     
  17. Rutherglen1794

    Rutherglen1794 Puritan Board Sophomore

    Can you share with me some of Wilson’s problematic views about manhood? I have his book Future Men, so Id like to know beforehand what to watch for.
     
  18. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Basically everything is wrong, even the stuff that would be "right" by anyone else.

    I'll try to find all of the problems later. Even where he might seem "right," he always says yes and no and "hahah look how funny I am" every time he communicates.
     
  19. VictorBravo

    VictorBravo Administrator Staff Member

    I'd suggest, for a start, reading the Lewis essay "Men Without Chests" at the beginning of the Abolition of Man.

    It's certainly not a "how to be a man" work, but it might open the eyes to what used to be essential.
     
  20. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Much of Wilson will sound fine. I admit that. But you are reading a man whose theology has been formally condemned by NAPARC. That should mean something.

    Go to ArtofManliness and browse there. Not a full endorsement but usually some good stuff. Do kettlebell swings so it will align your shoulders and back so that you naturally stand in a contrapasso stance
     
  21. Santos

    Santos Puritan Board Freshman

    So, stay away from Doug Wilson but go and learn from that Mormon at Art Of Manliness?
     
  22. C. M. Sheffield

    C. M. Sheffield Puritan Board Junior

    Really? The Art of Manliness has openly extolled the benefits of Jesuit Spirituality!

    The contempt of Doug Wilson by some is, at times, mystifying. I share the same concerns with his errors. Let that be clear. But I also appreciate his witness of the gospel and his boldness in calling out the errors and excesses of the postmodern Evangelical Church.
     
  23. Rutherglen1794

    Rutherglen1794 Puritan Board Sophomore

    I’ve got my Pavel Tsatsouline videos qued up for when I can start swinging my kettlebell consistently.
     
  24. Pergamum

    Pergamum Ordinary Guy (TM)

    Dalrock is a better theologian than most men in the church.
     
  25. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    The website has numerous writers and I said it had problems.

    Wilson has been formally condemned by NAPARC.
     
  26. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    Yes to the first question. No to the second question. I said the Art of Manliness had some good ideas. I didn't say embrace the whole program. I am going to repeat those two sentences. I said the Art of Manliness had some good ideas. I didn't say embrace the whole program.

    I generally operate on the assumption that the critical reader can evaluate various ideas and reject some. While this seems to allow the same courtesy to Wilson, there are some differences. Wilson says "yes and no hahaha I am funny" to every proposition. And his theology--which he never rejected--has been formally condemned.
     
  27. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

    I was a Wilsonite 14 years ago. I defended him at all costs. I live in an area that is (or used to be) heavily Wilsonite. I know of what I speak. There is a reason his teaching is formally condemned.

    As to the OP. Just don't be a soyboy. Be decisive. Do kettlebells.
     
  28. C. M. Sheffield

    C. M. Sheffield Puritan Board Junior

    What does that mean? They condemned him or FV? Where was this action recorded?

    You are welcome to your opinion of Wilson as having nothing of value to say. But it's an opinion I do not share. I have never been a "Wilsonite" but I think most of what he writes about our current cultural moment is spot-on.
     
  29. BayouHuguenot

    BayouHuguenot Puritan Board Doctor

  30. TylerRay

    TylerRay Puritan Board Senior

    What Perg said. ^^^ The terms are pretty much useless, unless the one speaking defines his terms. In a recent Facebook discussion on this topic, I described myself as a complementarian, and told what I meant by it. A self-identified patriarchalist told me that I was actually a patriarchalist.
     
    Last edited: Jul 20, 2019

Share This Page