Biblical Patriarchy Against the Feminization of the Church

My gut feeling on the patriarchy is that it is biblical and my gut feeling on the feminization of the church is that it is not biblical. However, I didn’t understand what the issues really were nor would I have been able to justify those gut feelings until I listened to some of Mike Richter’s videos at The Heroes’ Forge. The theme of The Heroes’ Forge is “Men want to be heroes, and women want to be with heroes.”

The history of the feminization of the Church as Mike Richter outlines it in the video below begins with Elizabeth Cady Stanton in 1848. Today, the feminized alternatives to biblical patriarchy fall under terms like the covertly feminized variations of “complementarianism” or the overtly feminized variations of “egalitarianism”.

What makes the various positions of complementarianism and egalitarianism unbiblical are verses, such as, Ephesians 3:14-15, Acts 2:29, Hebrews 7:4, Matthew 6:9, Genesis 2:7, 22, 1 Timothy 2:12-14, Genesis 18:19, Ephesians 5:22-24, and Matthew 7:16. Mike Richter refers to these verses in the video below beginning at 13:48 showing how they stand as a rebuke against the feminized church.

This Is a Test

Are you defensive about those verses above when they refer to “patriarch” or God as “Father” or when they talk about a wife’s submission to her husband or a husband’s responsibility as head of his family or that there are consequences when these verses are ignored that are seen in the fruit of a family’s life? Do you realize that these verses are not optional?

If you need to repent, now is always the best time to do so.

The feminization of the Church has much in common with Darwinian and big bang evolution: They are all a corruption of Genesis 1-11.

They were introduced over the last few hundred years to undermine biblical Christianity while fooling Christians who followed them into thinking that they were still “biblical” or still “full gospel”. Many of these now Christian-in-name-only feminized therapy organizations capitulated to become the institutional “church” we see today.

Below Mike Richter interviews David Edgington. It is a continuation of the topics covered above.

______