Intellectuelle

Thanks for posting this video, Ilona.

I think that in an interview like this it is difficult to articulate a cohesive theology – both Baucham and Feinberg had to respond with brief answers. That said, I think that Baucham was more articulate than Feinberg. However, a situation like this, which requires sound-byte, talking-point-type answers, also allows theological errors to be clearly seen.

We see whole doctrines and “theologies” built upon a few verses – often misinterpreted, at that. For example, Baucham says that the woman’s place is in the home, based on Titus 2:5. But that’s a common misrepresentation of that passage, which is actually telling women that they should be mindful of their own business and their own responsibilities, rather than other people’s, not spending their time in dissipation. It’s a character thing, out of which both general and specific duties stem, not merely a specific job prescription with a check-box beside it.

I don’t really think we’re going to see a turnaround on this, in the near future anyway, and maybe never. I think it’s up to individuals to do their own thinking and figure out for themselves what their pastors and teachers aren’t (or are) telling them, and then act upon it. And encourage others to do the same, and share their own insights when the opportunity arises.

I don't think this is a "maybe never" theological standoff. What I believe is happening is that people move forward in their understanding of such things only as far as they have to, and then tend to get stuck as situations create the need to further explore the meaning of scripture. In this case the need is for what is now considered a "side" of the POV must articulate the way doctrine applies to a situation and move forward in understanding.

Baucham takes a "no woman" should lead (implied in the take that it means a nation is under judgment). Does he, is he willing to take this to the point that women don't work? Or that women should not be leaders in business, etc? That is, that Christian women sin if they follow this path in the secular world? You see, I just don't think many complementarians want to say that this is what scripture teaches; they can't fully support that idea from scripture.

I think the other side of it represented by what Feinberg seems to say ( in the short time given here) has the answer outside of reaching into a "culture" based rationale.

There must be a way to apply a cohesive theology to the circumstance of women in leadership. We ought to at least be able to understand it.

"I think that in an interview like this it is difficult to articulate a cohesive theology "
That's true, but as you said Baucham was the more articulate- ready to take the theology into the form of doctrinal statement. I thought it was interesting that the news media would give theology a platform of expression... and disappointed that as Evangelicals we don't have an answer that we can give ( just more arguing points!)