Panel of Nans

Sarah’s Grandma had a knack of predicting accurately the winner of the X Factor and of Britain’s Got Talent each year. It made me think that a fantastic spin off show would involve getting 4 grandmas to sit as the judging panel for the next talent contest -hence the show title “panel of nans.” IContinue reading “Panel of Nans”

Re-mapping the Gender Role debate

We tend to describe the debate about gender roles in church and the family as divided between egalitarians and complementarians.  However, I have been wondering whether this properly captures the nuances of the discussion.  So, here is an attempt to remap where the agreement and disagreement is. I am starting with the assumption that theContinue reading “Re-mapping the Gender Role debate”

Leadership is not about the committee you attend

Imagine if the way that your family functioned was that the husband/dad went down to the garden shed and made some decisions. Maybe he called round a few other men to join him for this meeting. Then afterwards, they came out and pronounced their wisdom. You can be by conviction a complementarian and still feelContinue reading “Leadership is not about the committee you attend”

Flourish – Valuing women in church life

Here’s the video of our later After Eight which includes a helpful interview with Sophie Killingley based around Aimee Byrd’s book “Recovering From Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.” We want this to be the start, not the end of the conversation.

Biblical Manhood and Womanhood – Hierarchialism and Complementarianism are simply not the same

I am a complementarian in terms of my views of men and women and their roles in church and home.  This means that I believe men and women are not interchangeable.  This has two specific (and only two) applications. It means that Ephesians 5 talks about husbands sacrificially loving their wives, wives submitting to theirContinue reading “Biblical Manhood and Womanhood – Hierarchialism and Complementarianism are simply not the same”

When pastoral questions might be linked (A further response to Beth Moore)

I want to come back to Beth Moore’s questions.  Now we assumed that the two questions were hypothetical and that they were about two distinct scenarios. However, suppose that they weren’t.  Of course, only Beth Moore knows the answer to that. Certainly I get the feel that they are at least based on her wealthContinue reading “When pastoral questions might be linked (A further response to Beth Moore)”

Husbands, wives, Ephesians 5 and mental health (responding to Beth Moore’s questions)

Earlier in the week, Beth Moore asked two questions, specifically aimed at men who hold to a complementarian view of male/female relationships in the church and family.[1]  Whilst she asked for quick tweet answers, I wanted to make a fuller response. So here it is. My friend Steve Kneale has also written and so IContinue reading “Husbands, wives, Ephesians 5 and mental health (responding to Beth Moore’s questions)”

Recovering from Biblical manhood and womanhood – a review

I finally sat down to read Aimee Byrd’s book Recovering From Biblical Manhood and Womanhood today (birthday present). You may recall that a few weeks back I had written in defence of Aimee following some rather unpleasant goings on in an online facebook group. Well I thought it was important to sit down and readContinue reading “Recovering from Biblical manhood and womanhood – a review”

Does the Son submit to the Father? Some further thoughts

I recently shared some thoughts about the relationship of the Son to the Father in the light of Aimee Byrd’s book “Recovering From Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.  My position is that it is correct to say that the Son does submit to the Father but unhelpful to describe this as Eternal Subordination.  Here are someContinue reading “Does the Son submit to the Father? Some further thoughts”

The Trinity Controversy (Aimee Byrd and complementarianism part 2)

Blurbs about Aimee Byrd’s book, Recovering from Biblical manhood and womanhood have highlighted a few issues she picks up on, one of which is that she views that approach to complementarianism as linked to an unorthodox view of the Trinity. What is the problematic view? Well, let’s start by going back to first principles. WhenContinue reading “The Trinity Controversy (Aimee Byrd and complementarianism part 2)”