Tag Archives: christian feminism

If Your Husband is a Godly Man, Submission Will Be Easy!

Such is the message that continues to be preached to Christian women by other Christian women who should know better.

Back in 2010, Nancy Wilson published her book Why Isn’t a Pretty Girl Like You Married? and Other Useful Comments. Earlier this year she published Single and Satisfied: A Grace-Filled Calling for the Unmarried Woman. According to the Amazon description, this new book is actually the second edition of the first book.

This is the second and revised edition of Why Isn’t a Pretty Girl Like You Married?

Any regular reader of mine won’t be shocked to learn that Nancy Wilson delivers the same poisonous lies about wifely submission today that she did ten years ago. The following quote appears in both books, almost on the same pages:

The Bible requires wives to submit to their own husbands, so a woman ought to marry a man that she respects. If she respects him, she will be able to freely submit to him. If he is the kind of man who is eager to please and obey God, she should not have trouble following him. The Bible also requires wives to respect and honor their husbands. So it follows that a woman should marry a man that she can easily look up to. Respect and honor are far more easily rendered to a respectable, honorable man.

Page 71 of “Single and Satisfied: A Grace-Filled Calling for the Unmarried Woman”, and page 73 of “Why Isn’t a Pretty Girl Like You Married? and Other Useful Comments”

Nancy Wilson doubtless has more experience being a Christian wife and mother than your average woman. In spite of all that, to this day, she is still preaching feminist falsehoods, laying the seeds for marital strife in the minds of single Christian women. Paragraphs like these demonstrate why even older Christian women shouldn’t be allowed to teach anyone at all unless they are well and thoroughly vetted by their male spiritual leaders first. Let’s walk through it and explain where she goes wrong:

The Bible requires wives to submit to their own husbands, so a woman ought to marry a man that she respects.


If she respects him, she will be able to freely submit to him.

A. Being able to submit “freely” is not a biblical prerequisite for submission, nor can it be. Slaves couldn’t “freely” submit to their masters, but that didn’t stop God from commanding their submission.

B. Who says a woman can’t submit, freely or otherwise, to a man she doesn’t respect? Those commands of submission in the Bible go out to women across the board. That includes women who are already married, which would include women married to men they didn’t respect. Could they not submit to their husbands then? Is that something they are simply unable to do, in Nancy Wilson’s mind?

If he is the kind of man who is eager to please and obey God, she should not have trouble following him.

Completely and totally false. Incorrect. Unbiblical tripe that no older Christian woman should be caught dead preaching. Remember, this is from Nancy Wilson, an experienced wife and mother, and a woman who has given marital counselling. She has a great deal of personal interactions with women who struggle in this area. Apparently none of it has clued her into the struggles Christian women have in following their husbands.

The desire to disobey your leader is one all humans experience, from young to old. We are sinners that love our sin. It’s an evil, perverse desire of ours that we will experience whether or not the one in charge of us is eager to obey God. That’s our lot in life. Disobedience feels good. We don’t need our parents/bosses to be unbelievers before we experience a desire to disobey them. We’ll want to disobey them with or without their help. A Christian woman will still want to disobey even a Godly husband. She will have plenty of trouble following him because she herself is a sinful human who loves to sin for its own sake. Thus, Christian women will always have trouble following even a man who loves and obeys God.

The Bible also requires wives to respect and honor their husbands. So it follows that a woman should marry a man that she can easily look up to. Respect and honor are far more easily rendered to a respectable, honorable man.

Women should definitely marry men they can easily look up to. No question there. The lie comes from what came before; That obeying, showing respect, etc. will all be easy if the right steps are taken. This is false. It’s never going to be “easy”. Christian women should marry a man they can look up to so they can reduce the intensity of the difficult struggles to come. Nancy Wilson fundamentally denies this. Yes, she does say respect and honor are “far more easily rendered”, but immediately prior to this she was saying that, “If he is the kind of man who is eager to please and obey God, she should not have trouble following him.” There is a basic expectation that a woman’s struggle to obey and honor her husband can be made easy, or even dodged altogether. Again, this is simply false, and it’s something that single Christian women should never be taught. They’re going to have enough difficult obeying their husbands and calling them Lord in the best of circumstances. The last thing we need planted in their heads is the thought that if their husbands are doing their job, they won’t want to undermine him. Rebellious women are already chomping at the bit for excuses to justify their disobedience and disrespect. You think they won’t seize upon teachings like this, when they in their sinful rebellion are looking for some way to tear their husbands down while still appearing to be the good guy? Of course they will.

I’ll do it because I want to, not because you told me too!

If you are (were) a regular reader of Dalrock, then you’re familiar with a particular claim made by complementarians- namely, that husbands are forbidden from demanding submission from their wives. Even the authors that affirm that husbands’ have authority over their wives feel a compulsion to discourage those husbands from ever demanding their wives submit to them. Either they tell the husband to mind his own business (see Dalrock’s article here), or they simply assert that because a wife’s submission should be voluntary, then the husband can’t demand it from her.

Kevin DeYoung is one of the latest authors to fall into this pattern. This past April he released a book titled Men and Women in the Church. He, like most complementarians, understand that husbands having headship over their wives means that he has authority over her.

Likewise, in Ephesians 5 Paul says wives are to submit to their husbands, for the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church (5:22–23). Citing the headship of the husband as a reason for the wife’s submission makes little sense if headship implies only source or origin without any reference to male leadership. Kephale, in at least these two instances in Ephesians, must mean “authority over.”

DeYoung, Kevin. Men and Women in the Church (p. 44). Crossway. Kindle Edition.

But because he is a complementarian, Kevin can’t leave it at that. He must undermine headship in some manner:

Because of these two realities—the headship of the husband in the created order and the analogy of Christ and the church—the wife should freely submit to her husband.

And don’t miss that word freely. The command is for the wife, not the husband. The man is never told to submit the wife unto himself. Instead, the woman is told to submit herself unto her husband. It is a submission freely given, never forcibly taken.

Kevin DeYoung, Page 66 of Men and Women in the Church Paperback – April 6, 2021

One might simply reply with, “Says who?” This passive-aggressive warning to husbands is never backed up with Scripture. Let’s say a husband wants to, in Kevin’s words, forcibly take his wife’s submission? If that’s a sin, then why is there no verse in the Bible that teaches that?

This should strike complementarians as very odd, considering that men living in ancient times had all kinds of legal justification to compel their wives to do things. Add to that the frequent New Testament emphases on wives submitting to their husbands, and you have a recipe for utter disaster- assuming DeYoung’s perspective is correct. The men from such a sexist culture would certainly latch onto these teachings and run wild with it! They might assume that they had the right to do that very thing that Kevin DeYoung decries- namely, forcing their wives to submit to them. Paul and other NT writers would have been aware of this, right? Surely they would have made sure to warn these ancient brutes that to force their wives to submit would be to sin against God! But they never did.

Now, Kevin DeYoung is technically correct when he says that husbands are, “…never told to submit the wife unto himself.” However, he is only correct in the strict sense that there is no verse in the Bible that contains such a simplistic, word-for-word command. In a debate, such a statement would be eviscerated for being utterly irrelevant. If that kind of statement carried any weight, then one could just as easily refute it by pointing out that husbands are, “…never told NOT to submit the wife unto himself.” Now what?

However, let’s set that issue aside for a moment and examine Kevin’s claim that, “…the woman is told to submit herself unto her husband. It is a submission freely given, never forcibly taken.” Let’s try and parse out what’s wrong with this carefully.

Let’s say we lived in a society where we legally enforced God’s command for wives to submit to their husbands. Let’s also assume that if a married woman broke this law, her husband could punish her for doing so. Let’s say he has the liberty to bring his wife before a judge and subject her to punishments such as monetary fines, beatings, jail-time, etc. This could reasonably be an example of a husband “forcibly taking” submission” from his wife. You might even call it slavery!

Where Kevin DeYoung goes wrong is in assuming that if submission is forcibly taken, then it can’t be freely given. I’ve gone into this in detail in I’m not going to submit like those lousy slaves! and The Greek Says My Husband Can’t Demand Submission From Me!. Very briefly, there is this errant assumption Christians keep making wherein we assume that if a person can be compelled to do something by another, then they cannot obey that other person in a voluntary or meaningfully respectful manner. This is a common assumption, but it is a false assumption. The Bible contradicts it clearly in Ephesians 6:5-6 and 1 Peter 2:18-20 when it commands slaves to do that very thing to their masters. These slaves/bondservants were compelled by law and by force to obey their masters, and yet, the Bible still commands them to obey sincerely, respectfully, and in a willing manner.

Now let’s get back to wives. Let’s say a husband does “forcibly take” his wife’s submission. Does that prevent his wife from giving it voluntarily? Of course not.

If Kevin DeYoung’s assumption had merit, then surely Paul and Peter left many a born-again slave befuddled as to how they would obey those commands. After all, if they had no choice but to obey their masters, then submission could not be freely given! This is absurd, of course, and it’s just as absurd for Kevin DeYoung to come to such a wrong-headed conclusion about husbands and wives. Wives are commanded to submit to their husbands whether they are being forced to or not.

In fact, when DeYoung claims that wives should submit entirely of their own volition, then he’s teaching a Christianized version of the protests of rebellious children. We’ve all heard young kids say, “I’ll do it because I want to, not because you tell me too!” Wives certainly should not speak that way to their husbands, but when it comes down to it, that’s what complementarians believe. They would not advocate a wife speak in that manner, but when it comes to how they see wifely submission, they think that’s exactly right. Submission MUST be freely given, and hence, wives can, in a theologically sophisticated manner, disobey their husband on the grounds that he tried to forcibly take that which must only be freely given.

It’s unbiblical, and it’s irrational. Imagine trying to defend this kind of teaching in a debate. One of my readers suggested that Kevin DeYoung might be open to debating his views. Given how flawed his thinking is, I very seriously doubt that he will ever leave himself open to such scrutiny. I know I wouldn’t if I were him.

“Narrow Complementarian” CBMW Director Votes Against the Abolition of Human Abortion

Just yesterday I wrote about the SBC’s spiral into leftism was a predictable outcome of the Southern Baptist embrace of that Christian form of feminism, I.E. complementarianism. There are other reasons why this has happened, but the point is that this 21st convention of the SBC is revealing just how deep the cancer had spread.

Thanks to men like William (Bill) Ascol, we know that the problem was even worse than we thought. He proposed a resolution that would call for Southern Baptists everywhere in every capacity to abolish human abortion in every form, no exceptions, no if’s, and’s, or but’s (You can find the full-text for this resolution in this bulletin on page 10). He garnered enough support at #SBC21 that the resolution had to be voted on, which tells you there is a decent number of Godly Christian church leaders who wanted this resolution passed. Unfortunately, it was not passed, and guess who voted against it?

This guy:

Denny Burk, a Southern Baptist and director of the Council of Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, voted against this resolution. He even announced that he would do so.

This man voted against a resolution that would exhort all Southern Baptists everywhere to do whatever they could to abolish abortion, and to not allow exceptions to this rule to prevent them from doing so. Enough Southern Baptists recognize this is a dead-end approach to abolishing abortion and want their brothers and sisters to forsake it in favor of complete, no-holds-barred abolition. Denny Burk fought against this resolution for that exact reason. There must, absolutely MUST be allowances made for abortion in exceptional cases.

This is where the so-called biblical manhood part is utterly absent in the CBMW’s director. Denny should have the manly courage and bravery to call for Southern Baptists to fight with all their might to end abortion. No rational reason can be given to keep abortion legal purely because a few women with ectopic pregnancies may die if they can’t have one. As far as saving lives goes, that’s a pretty darn good trade compared to the approximately 1 million+ abortions that occur every year. A few adult women dying for lack of exceptions in our nation’s laws shouldn’t concern us if it means saving over a million other lives. A real man of God should be mentally prepared to dismiss such feminist-pandering concerns without a second-thought.

Here we see one of the most glaring examples proving that complementarianism is Christian-feminism. Denny Burk is the director of the organization that coined the very term, and what do you know? He voted against abolishing abortion. He also joined the feminist feeding frenzy on Paige Patterson back in 2018. His own organization created the Statement On Abuse that makes it impossible for any Christian man to do or say anything negative towards his wife.

We believe abuse can be defined as any act or failure to act resulting in imminent risk, serious injury, death, physical or emotional or sexual harm, or exploitation of another person.

We condemn all forms of physical, sexual and/or verbal abuse.


You might wonder, “How many ways can a complementarian act like a feminist before we can formally classify him as a Christian feminist?” That’s a good question. Maybe it’s time Christians everywhere just call complementarianism what it is- Christian feminism. Just don’t try to pass a resolution stating as much at #SBC22, since you can be sure that the director of the CBMW himself will be ready and waiting to vote against it.

Southern Baptists Are Getting What They Deserve

For those not aware, this pastor is now the president of the Southern Baptist Convention. He is a woke pastor who, according to this article, is okay with his wife preaching alongside him, and decries people who oppose critical race theory. He is one among many who has made it a point to belabor just how mean and evil whites have behaved towards blacks, which tells you all you need to know about where this man stands politically.

Why did he win? Were there not more Christian, orthodox men who wanted the job? At least one man, Al Mohler, did run, but he only got 26% of the votes. Assuming the voting process is not corrupted, then the majority of Southern Baptists who voted have made their desires clear. Most of them want a man in charge who will lead the convention to the left. It’s a tragic turn of events. Perhaps if Mohler won the presidency he could have slowed down the SBC’s descent into depravity. Perhaps.

I assume a lot of Southern Baptists will wonder what on earth they did to deserve this outcome. Why has God placed an evil man in the role of their president? I’d like to suggest that maybe, just maybe, that Southern Baptists are getting what they should have expected to get after the way they’ve behaved over the past 15+ years.

#1 – They engaged in and encouraged other Christians to engage in alienating the Christians among them who affirmed a belief in Calvinism. I believe the Calvinist resurgence in the SBC began in the early 2000’s, and it picked up speed in 2006. Southern Baptist preachers and teachers went on a warpath, decrying Calvinism as a move away from the gospel, and hounding Christians in the SBC who identified as Calvinists. They were vilified by the likes of Jerry Falwell, Ergun & Emir Caner, and later on by men like David Allen and most of the men who helmed the John 3:16 conference. Southern Baptists made it a point to incite distrust and suspicion of Christian men who affirmed the doctrines of grace, and looking back now, it is all the more foolish considering just how many grave issues lay at their door. Who cares if a man in your church is a Calvinist when you have the celebration of sexual debauchery pounding on your door? This engendered a lack of unity that obviously left them vulnerable when a strong, anti-Christian, pro-sexual depravity force came along.

#2 – They have embraced a complementarian view of marriage and sexuality. They may have paid lip service to the doctrine of the Husband’s authority and headship over his wife and home, but as we all know, it was just that. Lip service. A grudging admission that yeah, it’s in the Bible, but we all better watch it, because it’s only one small step from affirming patriarchy to having women by the thousands being tortured, mutiliated, raped, and murdered by their husbands. They routinely attacked the men who would assert their authority over their wives. In doing so they destroyed men’s natural desire to be bold, to make decisions, and to demand their wives and children (and pastors, God forbid) adhere to a God-honoring family structure. Is anyone really surprised that a convention filled with emasculated men lacked the spine to stand their ground against the attacks of feminism or social justice?

#3 – They have deliberately disobeyed God’s command to forbid women from teaching biblical theology. Al Mohler played a deliberate role in this, as he welcome Mary Kassian, a founding member of the Council of Biblical Manhood & Womanhood to join the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary faculty back in 2005. In his words:

“We’re absolutely thrilled to have the person I consider to be the premier evangelical scholar and writer in the area of gender roles join the Southern Seminary faculty,” Mohler said.

“As distinguished professor of women’s studies, Mary Kassian brings an international reputation combined with deep biblical convictions and a tremendous ability to communicate, to teach and to share her passion for a biblical understanding of these issues.

“This is a great development for Southern Seminary and another representation of what God is giving us in this faculty. We look forward to having Mary join us in the classroom, on the faculty and as a part of the Southern Seminary family.”


This is not even touching upon the unbiblical things Mary Kassian has taught.

Let’s not forget Paige and Dorothy Patterson who were doing the same thing Mohler did:

Patterson, along with her husband, were instrumental in establishing women’s studies programs at Southwestern and at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, where Paige Patterson was president until his election at Southwestern in 2003.

Dorothy Patterson was the only woman in the founding of the Council for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood and has authored, coauthored and/or edited more than a dozen books, including “The Study Bible for Women,” which received Christian Retailing’s top award in 2015 for devotional/study Bibles; the Old and New Testament volumes of the “Women’s Evangelical Commentary”; and “The Christian Homemaker’s Handbook.”


See how that accursed council keeps rearing its ugly head? Southern Baptists were absolutely clueless about the destruction the CBMW would wreak among them. So what if they have women teachers? So what if it violates Scripture? It’s not like we’re all going to become raving feminists!

Which leads me to my next point:

#4 – They have fully and happily embraced a feminist attitude towards men. Feminist hate men, they hate Christian men who preach Patriarchy from the pulpit, and they want to destroy them. Yes, I’m saying Southern Baptists have become exactly that. If you don’t believe me, let me remind you how they treated Paige Patterson. His crime was objectifying a woman, and preaching that a woman who was beaten by her husband should stay in her marriage and pray for her husband. He told her to rely entirely upon God to change him. For this, he was all but burned at the stake only 3 years ago. Dalrock covered this in extensive detail here, but let’s not forget just how viscously they treated this man for what he said:

Deeming the information demanded immediate action and could not be deferred to a regular meeting of the Board, based on the details presented, the Executive Committee unanimously resolved to terminate Dr. Paige Patterson, effective immediately, removing all the benefits, rights and privileges provided by the May 22-23 board meeting, including the title of President Emeritus, the invitation to reside at the Baptist Heritage Center as theologian-in-residence and ongoing compensation.


Unbeknownst to Paige Patterson, he had a HUGE group of people around him and below him who hated him and wanted him gone. Now, how did that happen? How did such a sudden swell of feminists have the power and influence to take him down? Hadn’t he been a good complementarian preacher who even allowed his wife to teach? Surely he had done nothing to encourage feminism in the church, had he? There’s no way that thousands of women in the SBC would all band together to take him down, right?

The sad part is, I think even most truly born-again Southern Baptists will never figure this out. Complementarianism is Christian Feminism, and Feminism engenders hatred for men who dare to stand against it.

Prime example? Al Mohler. Yes, that guy.

When Paige Patterson was being destroyed by his enemies, Al Mohler, that supposed far-right leaning leader in the SBC, joined the feminists in tearing him down.

A church, denomination, or Christian ministry must look outside of itself when confronted with a pattern of mishandling such responsibilities, or merely of being charged with such a pattern. We cannot vindicate ourselves. That is the advice I have given consistently for many years. I now must make this judgment a matter of public commitment. I believe that any public accusation concerning such a pattern requires an independent, third-party investigation. In making this judgment, I make public what I want to be held to do should, God forbid, such a responsibility arise.(…)

The #MeToo moment has come to American evangelicals. This moment has come to some of my friends and brothers in Christ. This moment has come to me, and I am called to deal with it as a Christian, as a minister of the Gospel, as a seminary and college president, and as a public leader. I pray that I will lead rightly.


Denny Burk, yet another Southern Baptist member of that damned council, joined with Al Mohler in throwing Patterson under the bus. These men, plus the members of the SWBTS board of trustees, are unquestionably more educated than your average Southern Baptist. They’ve studied issues surrounding marriage and sexuality for years, and in Mohler and Burk’s case, decades prior to this. They should have been among the men who unapologetically stood behind Patterson when he needed them, and they stabbed him in the back. Took it as an opportunity to distinguish themselves as the good guys so that the evil, resentful men and women who hated them would spare them their wrath.

At this late stage in June of 2021, it should be no surprise whatsoever that a woke, social justice crony has been given power over the convention. This is what you get, my Southern Baptist brothers. You attack your Christian brothers, you fostered a movement of hatred for fathers and husbands, rebelled against God’s commands for your preachers and teachers to be male exclusively, and you don’t know the first thing about loyalty when one of your brothers comes under attack. Sorry, guys, but you’re getting exactly what you deserve.

P.S. When it comes to Al Mohler, I haven’t even touched upon his seething, alienating response to his silence on the problem of social justice amongst evangelicals. He clearly does not get along well with those who disagree with him, and is ready to go scorched-earth with anyone who would. This was just another side-example of the disunity Southern Baptists struggle with. James White covered this in detail here.

Sheila Gregoire Wants To Dox People Who Don’t Like Her

Some guy on Twitter had the audacity to tell Sheila Gregoire that he didn’t appreciate her presuming to talk to him about his family.

Not being accustomed to men telling her to buzz off, Sheila re-framed her nosiness as merely delivering information to an ignorant man.

One of Sheila’s simping fans decided that this man ought to be doxed for the despicable things he said.


Sheila much appreciated Kyle’s white-knighting, and heartily agreed with him.


Amazing, isn’t it? This man who dared denigrate Sheila Gregoire needs to be doxed. His identity needs to be revealed, and he needs to be investigated. He’s among the sickest of abusers, or at least, an enabler of such men.

But what was the wrong-think that motivated Sheila to talk to the man anyway?

Thebedouin wasn’t interested in having a lengthy theological treatise on the subject of modesty and boys thoughts. Maybe Sheila was, but he wasn’t. He didn’t bother entertaining her super-duper-smart 20,000-strong survey report. He simply had the gall to point out that if what this sign said is true, then there’s no reason for girls to dress modestly. He’s right, of course, but that’s just not okay with the great Sheila Gregoire. To her and her simping fan Kyle, this man needs to be punished.

I suppose I can thank these two for reminding me why thankless work like running this blog must go on. These “Nice Christian Ladies” need to be exposed by anyone willing to do so, and they must be called to repent for their sinful intrusion into other people’s lives. Sheila Gregoire needs to be reigned in by her church, her husband, and anyone who has a hint of self-awareness of what she’s doing.