Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
INTERVIEW – Wayne Grudem, Part Three – Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism

INTERVIEW – Wayne Grudem, Part Three – Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism

Last updated on: December 6, 2006 at 5:00 pm by Adrian Warnock

INTERVIEW – Wayne Grudem, Part Three – Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism 2006-12-06T17:00:00+00:00 Adrian Warnock

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

This interview is being serialised over several days. So far I have published part one, which focused on personal issues, and part two, in which we discussed Systematic Theology. At the end of yesterday’s post we began to talk about his new book, Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism. Today we explore Grudem’s charge that feminism inevitably leads to a denial of Scripture’s authority. The interview is summarised in my post Dr Wayne Grudem Interview – Highlights and Reflections.

Adrian
I was impressed by your compassion and fairness in the introduction of your new book expressed towards your egalitarian colleagues who you mention by name. Have any of them responded to you yet – in particular concerning your challenge to publically object to feminist arguments that undermine the truthfulness of the Bible and lead towards liberalism?

Wayne
I have received a very kind and thoughtful letter from one of the men I name, but I have not seen any public response yet.

Adrian
The bulk of your book is to catalogue and explain fifteen claims that directly deny the authority of Scripture and ten claims that indirectly deny or undercut the authority of Scripture.

You say in your book that people should beware that “if you give way at one point you may provide a huge opening for the enemy to flood in.” When it comes to evangelical feminists, is it true that many of them are just ceding one point to a more liberal approach – perhaps a very different point to another egalitarian in the next town – or do most of them hold to all of the points you mention in your book? Is it only when you put a patchwork quilt together of a number of people’s “one points” that you end up with the rather depressing picture of general compromise with the truth of the Bible that emerges in your book?

Wayne
I think that any one of these mistakes that I name can start a church or denomination down the road toward liberalism. And what troubles me is that influential egalitarian groups such as Christians for Biblical Equality promote a large number of these mistakes.

Of course, nobody holds all of these erroneous views because some of them are mutually exclusive. For example, some people say that Paul did not prohibit women from being pastors or elders even in his day, and they try to argue that from the text. Others say he did prohibit women from being pastors or elders in his day, but those commands are no longer for our modern age. These viewpoints are mutually exclusive because they have different positions on what Paul meant for the age in which he wrote.

What troubles me is the willingness on the part of a number of groups to use very little discernment and just to adopt what seems to me like any argument they can find as long as it supports their evangelical feminist views.

Adrian
It seems to me that the core of your argument is that it simply isn’t possible to hold to the accuracy and clarity of the Bible whilst believing in evangelical feminism.

Wayne
Well, some people do hold to both evangelical feminism and the inerrancy of the Bible, but my point is that they are inconsistent and that those who come after them will be more consistent with the logic that undermines the authority of the Bible, and we see that already in many denominations. So, yes, those who adopt these principles can use them to prove most anything else from the Scripture as well, at least in a number of cases.

Adrian
One of the most shocking, but perhaps also most enticing, errors you mention is to remove parts of the Bible from consideration, either by saying they are clearly not in the original text (with no textual justification) or by saying that the verses are too “difficult” for us to benefit from considering. Do you think that the influential and well-known people you mention who hold to these positions really understand the significance of us putting ourselves in the position of judging the validity of biblical verses for us today?

Wayne
I doubt that people understand the full implications of a move like Gordon Fee’s in his commentary on 1 Corinthians when he basically says that 1 Corinthians 14:33–35 is too hard to reconcile with 1 Corinthians 11, and that is his main reason for saying those verses are not part of the Bible. (Ed. See footnote 15 on the NET translation of 1 Corinthians 14.) But we can’t just erase passages that are hard to reconcile with other passages! Just imagine what will happen if we start to take that approach with the Gospels or other passages that are hard to understand!

When the psalmist says, “The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever,” I think he means that it is all consistent, not contradictory. So if we think there is a contradiction we should keep studying the passage, and praying for God’s wisdom, until we do understand it.

As far as the other evangelical feminist approach you mentioned, namely, refusing to deal with the “difficult” or “disputed” passages – that has the same effect in an argument as taking those passages out of the Bible because no one can appeal to them any more. If I come to a pastor who is wanting to put women on the elder board, or to ordain women as pastors, and I say, “1 Timothy 2:11–14 prohibits that,” and he just says, “I don’t want to hear about that verse because it’s disputed,” then he has really decided that he won’t let that verse speak to the controversy. But that is the most central passage in the whole dispute, the one that speaks most directly to the issue! If we refuse to be subject to passages that speak most directly to an issue, then we are almost guaranteed to come to the wrong decision. I’m not sure if I can think of a better way to come to a wrong decision than excluding from the discussion the verses that speak most directly to an issue.

Yet this is essentially the approach taken by the position paper of the Assemblies of God on women in ministry, for example, or by the paper written by Rich Nathan, pastor of the Columbus, Ohio Vineyard, which the Association of Vineyard Churches now distributes to e

xplain why they are allowing all their churches to ordain women as elders and pastors if they wish. Rich Nathan (who is my friend) sadly writes that there are so many positions on these verses that no one can really reach a decision.

Do we really think God gave us a Bible in which we would be unable to understand what He wants us to know about leadership in marriage and in the church? Didn’t He intend it, in the midst of an unbelieving culture, to be “a lamp shining in a dark place” (2 Peter 1:19)?

When people just decide to dismiss the “disputed passages” on men and women, I don’t think they fully realize the fact that in every major doctrine of the faith, those who disagree with the doctrine actually turn the key passages into “disputed” passages. Try arguing about justification by faith alone with an educated Roman Catholic person, for example, and you’ll find that every passage is “disputed.” Or try arguing about the deity of Christ with a Jehovah’s Witness, and you’ll see how every passage is “disputed.” The same goes for the doctrine of the inerrancy of Scripture – people who deny it will dispute and argue and bring scholarly reasons to bear showing why they don’t have to believe in inerrancy.

It was the same in Jesus’ day where the religious leaders that opposed Jesus tried arguing with him at many points. I am thankful that the people who follow Jesus didn’t say, “Jesus and the religious leaders have disagreements about many passages in the Bible, and who are we to decide? I guess both positions must be right.” No, Jesus expected even ordinary people to be able to listen to him, and then to listen to the Pharisees, and then to decide who was faithfully teaching the Word of God. So I hope it will be that way today on this issue as well.

Continued in part four . . .

Psalms

Romans

Wayne Grudem

Previous Post

December 5, 2006

INTERVIEW - Wayne Grudem, Part Two - Systematic Theology and Controversy

Next Post

December 7, 2006 PHOTOS - Adrian meets Phil Johnson

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 1 and 2 Corinthians 1 and 2 Thessalonians 1 and 2 Timothy 1 John 300 Leaders A Life of Joy Abortion Acts of the Apostles Adrian on radio Adrian on TV Adrian's Story Albert Mohler Amazing Grace Arminocalvinist Spectrum Assurance Atonement Atonement Series Attributes of God Barnabas Best of the Blog Bible Bible Software Bible Translation Biblical Inerrancy Billy Graham Bob Roberts Books C. J. Mahaney Calvinism Cessationism Charis Warnock Charismatic Spectrum Charles Simeon Charles Spurgeon Church Leadership Colossians Complementarian - Egalitarian Spectrum Complementarianism Conferences Culture Daniel Debates Deuteronomy DGM08 DGM13 Discernment Doctrine Don Carson Ed Stetzer Eddy Leo Ephesians ESV Bible Translators Interview Evangelism in a Post-Christian World evolution Exodus Expository Preaching Ezekial Faith and Feelings Family Florida Galatians General Genesis Get Wisdom - Proverbs sermons Gifts of The Holy Spirit Gifts of the Holy Spirit 2006 Global Faith Forum Godly Attitudes Gospel Gospels Grace Greg Haslam Grudem vs Piper: The Baptism Debate Healing Heaven Hell and Rob Bell Hebrews Henry Tyler Henry Warnock Holy Spirit Holy Spirit Baptism Hope Reborn Hugh Palmer Irresistable Grace Isaiah J. I. Packer Jack Hayford Joel Joel Warnock John John Lanferman John MacArthur John Newton John Owen John Piper John Smyth Jonathan Edwards Josh Harris Justification Justin Taylor Kenneth Ulmer Leadership Leadership Lessons from 1 & 2 Samuel Lex Loizides Liam Goligher Lig Duncan Limited Atonement Lou Fellingham Mark Dever Mark Driscoll Martyn Lloyd-Jones Matt Chandler Mental Health Missionary Methods: St Paul’s or Ours? My Story N. T. Wright Nehemiah NWA08 NWA09 NWA10 Opinion OT History Books Pentateuch Personal Personal Revival Philippians PJ Smyth Podcast Politics Preaching Prophecy Proverbs Psalms Raised With Christ Reformed Charismatic Regeneration Relationships Resurrection Resurrection & Salvation Revival Rice Broocks Rich Man and Lazarus Rick Warren Rob Rufus Roland Allen Romans Sam Storms Sanctification Series Sermons Sermons on Philippians Serving Jesus at Work Sexuality Sin St Paul Steve Chalke Strange Fire Suffering T4G T4G Statement TAB09 Tamasin Warnock Teamwork Terry Virgo The Atonement Debate - Chalke book The Soulwinner The Spirit-Filled Church The Traitor Within Theologcial Spectrums Theosis Tim Challies Tim Keller Titus TOAM06 TOAM07 TOAM08 TOAM09 TOAM10 TOAM11 Todd Bentley Tope Koleoso Total Depravity Video Water Baptism Wayne Grudem Worship

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 May 2025 April 2025 January 2025 November 2024 October 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 August 2023 May 2023 April 2023 February 2023 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 August 2021 May 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 January 2019 December 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 June 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 June 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What did Jesus do for Jairus' daughter?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Healed her blindness Fed her Made her invisible Raised her from the dead

Books by This Author Books by Adrian Warnock

See All Titles »