One wife for Seven Brothers

Posted on October 24, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

Time for some fun. How on earth did a woman have seven husbands? A story with seven brothers dying after marrying the same woman has to have some answer, so we will attempt to resurrect a situation to accommodate the Sadducees question: “Teacher,” they said, “Moses wrote for us that if a man’s brother dies and leaves a wife but no children, the man must marry the widow and have children for his brother. Now there were seven brothers…. At the resurrection whose wife will she be (Mark 12:19-23 NIV).”

Which husband is going to stand up and be accountable for her? Good question. Let’s ask those who think husbands are going to stand up and account for their wives.

To understand this story we must have seven husbands dying, with the widow being married off to her brothers-in-law after each death, according to the Levirate Law so she could give her dead husband heirs. It is unlikely that the remaining six brothers were unmarried, so now we have the widow marrying several men who were already married and had a passel of kids.

This is how an improbable illustration goes, with each husband accounting for his wife for the short time she was his wife. For the story’s sake, the husbands make their accounting as soon as they arrive in Heaven.

The first husband stands before God to account for his widow: “She was so pretty, a little flighty, not given to good sense. In fact it was she who made me fall into the water. You see, I told her I could step out of the boat and walk on water, and, being a woman, she told me that I couldn’t. I stepped out just to show her that I could. She made me do it. I would not have done such a thing if she hadn’t told me I couldn’t.”

The second brother husband: “Well, you know I had to marry her because my fool brother went and got himself drowned because of her. She didn’t have any kids yet, and she wanted a boy to carry on my brother’s name. She got real sassy and burned the biscuits, and I had to teach her a lesson or two. Things were going along pretty good until I stepped out in front of that donkey I bought her to help her do her chores.”

The third brother husband: “I knew it wasn’t going to work almost as soon as I married her. She and Josephine and Zaphora didn’t get along. She never tried to fit in. She was always causing some kind of ruckus in the household. One day I came in and Josephine and Zaphora were chasing her out of the kitchen with a knife. I came between them and the knife hit me instead of her. Just one wrong move, and I got here first.”

The fourth brother husband: “The law said I had to do it, so I took her and Josephine in since neither of them had children. Zaphora ran off with the butcher, so I didn’t have her to worry about. But this wife! She made me pick up my own clothes, which is women’s work. But I tried to pacify her. I gave her a little spending money, not as much as I gave Josephine, because I had a fondness for Josephine, and she was special to me. Mr. Nice Guy, that’s me. In fact, I was being nice to her that day when she was walking because Josephine was pregnant and needed to ride. I was trying to help her after she accidentally slipped and fell into the ditch and grabbed onto me, but she pulled me down with her, and I hit my head on that rock and woke up here.”

The fifth one: “The little witch! Now they expected me to marry her. Oh, she was still pretty. But she had a mind of her own. Wouldn’t do a thing I told her to do. I already had seven children, and I thought my wife could use a little help around the house, so, like the law said, I married her and took her in. I couldn’t help it if the wife and kids did not like her. She was in the shed for only a few days. I was trying to teach her a lesson, but she was stubborn, just about tore the dang shed down, and when I ran inside to get her, the roof fell in on my head.”

Number six: “Look, it came down to this. I married her. She would not do anything right. She even wanted me to do all the work. Told me that I had to stay home at least two nights a week or she would never get with child. I couldn’t give up my friends. But, boy that woman sure could cook. Started making the best pies and fried eggs you ever ate. I had to set her straight every now and then, but making up was pure joy. Date cakes and puddings and eggs like they were going out of style. Guess I overdid it a little on the sweets, and here I am.”

The seventh, and last, brother stands before God to account for his wife: “I can’t really tell you much about her. We married one day, and I left for Egypt the next. You know, what with the other brothers and their untimely deaths and all. Last I heard she had taken up with some group that was following an itinerant preacher who was filling her head with some nonsense about her being equal.”

I like this one! This is one of my favorite blogs that I have written and I thought you might need a laugh today – what with all the political commercials and stuff swirling around on the internet.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The real meaning of 1 Peter 3: 1-6 is not about wifely submission

Posted on October 23, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

Christian Nationalism is huge today and women will suffer as they always do when men define roles. A favorite is 1 Peter 3, which is not about wifely submission at all. So, if 1 Peter 3 is not about wives submitting to their husbands, then what does it mean? What message does Peter really have for women?

“Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as elaborate hairstyles and the wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes. Rather, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God’s sight. For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to adorn themselves. They submitted themselves to their own husbands, like Sarah, who obeyed Abraham and called him her lord. You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear (1 Peter 3:1-7).”

This passage has been misused to tell women they must submit to their husbands. Some preachers even tell women that they must treat their husbands as Lord, because they say Sarah called Abraham “Lord.” But that is a misinterpretation and belittling of this passage. It is being used as a self-serving demand that women submit to their husbands, and, thus, to all men.

What is not taught is that this passage has a wonderful message to women today, just as it did to women in the First Century. The message is that they will be Mothers of a new nation. This time it would not be Israelites, but a new nation of Christians. These women are not just going to be daughters of Sarah, but they will be Mothers like Sarah. Being a daughter means that you are taking your cue from your mother, but being a Mother means that you are the one who is in charge.

When Peter said they would be Sarah’s daughters, he was telling them that the new life they had chosen as Christians was not going to be easy. Their husbands might not be Christians, and this would prove hard for them to live a Christian life when the father in the family did not live as a Christian. So, while it would be hard, if they do what is right (stay the course), and do not let fear control them, they will be birthing a new nation of Christians, and therefore they would be Mothers like Sarah. Instead of one Sarah, they would all be Sarahs!

The following paragraphs are from my book Dethroning Male Headship found at the end of the chapter called “They asked for Sarah first.”

Some like to quote Peter when he said Sarah called Abraham “master” in Genesis 18:12, “So Sarah laughed to herself as she thought, ‘After I am worn out and my master is old, will I now have this pleasure?’” The New International Version Bible uses the word “master,” unlike other translations that use the word “Lord.”

It is impossible to connect 1 Peter 3:1-6 to the words of Sarah found in Genesis to support the doctrine of wifely submission, but Bruce Ware, one of the members of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, attempts to do just that in his book, The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit: The Trinity as Theological Foundation for Family Ministry. Ware writes,

“I find it astonishing that it is in this text, of all New Testament passages that teach on husband and wife relations, that the strongest language is used to describe a wife’s submission! Peter appealed to Sarah as an example and said that she “obeyed Abraham, calling him lord” (1 Pet 3:6a), indicating that they would be Sarah’s “children” if they fearlessly followed this example.”

Ware, who is a professor of Christian Theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, has missed the beautiful promise of this passage. The promise is not that women would be Sarah’s children if they are submissive, but that they would become mothers like Sarah because they themselves would be founding a new nation of believers, not by giving birth in the physical sense, but by spreading the gospel message so people can be born again by the spirit.

To emphasize, Peter does NOT tell wives they are Sarah’s daughters if they submit to their husbands like Sarah did. What he DOES say was startling, and raised the hairs on their heads by its audacity. Peter tells these women that “like mother, like daughter” and just as their mother Sarah birthed a new nation, they, too, are birthing a new nation of believers.

We can interpret Peter’s words something like this, “That was the way it was done back in Sarah’s day, but things have changed. We are now under grace by faith, not under the law. You have done what is right in becoming Christ-followers, and are Sarah’s daughters—children of the freed woman—if you do not fear as you keep following Christ, and, like Sarah, you will birth this new nation of God’s people.”

Again, Paul says the same thing:

“Tell me, you who want to be under the law, are you not aware of what the law says? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise.

These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, and she is our mother (Sarah)….Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman,” Galatians 4:21-26, 31.

1 Peter 3 contains a powerful promise of building a nation of believers that is for all time.

Christian women in this 21st Century are also children of the free woman, but some still choose to cling to Hagar by holding to a master/slave relationship with their husbands, and pastors still enforce this type of submission, even when they know it is wrong.

Sarah is mentioned four times in the New Testament, three of which are specifically about her becoming the mother of a nation. 1 Peter 3:6 is too, but the greater truth of it has been neglected. By passionately claiming the first part of the scripture that says wives must submit to their husbands, the promise it held for New Testament wives has been ignored. This particular reference to Sarah in 1 Peter 3:6 emphasizes the new covenant and has those new Christian women actively participating in the ministry of the gospel by birthing a nation of believers (1 Peter 3:6; Hebrews 11:11; Romans 4:19; Galatians 4:2-26, 31).

Wives, continue in your marriages even if your husbands are unbelievers, for by doing so, you will be like Sarah, mothers of a nation of believers.

Male headship is dethroned when Peter told Christian women that they will be like Sarah, mothers of a nation of believers.

Male headship is dethroned when Peter told Christian women that they will be like Sarah, mothers of a nation of believers.Shirley Taylor Books (available on Amazon in print and on Kindle)
The Biblical Marriage Myth: The Devil Comes Calling
The Power of a Book: The Street Evangelist
Raising the Hood: A Christian Look at Manhood and Womanhood
Women Equal: No Buts
Dethroning Male Headship: 2nd Edition
From Wife to Widow: What I Know Now
Beyond the Grave: A Christian Dilemma

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

My God! I had no idea how bad it would get

Posted on October 19, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

Then years ago, I wrote “Oh, but we are not like that.” But now, our government leaders and Christian leaders want us to be just like that.

Christian Nationalism is akin to Sharia Law in more ways than one. And government leaders are promoting it. SBC and conservative pastors have always wanted women to lose their voice and vote, so they are all jumping on board. Voices few have even heard of such as conservative pastor Doug Wilson are leading the way. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth attends his church in Washing DC and in Tennessee, and promotes patriarchial beliefs against women.

My post years ago:

Vice President Joe Biden said that the Taliban is not our enemy. The Houston Chronicle even wrote an editorial disclaiming what Biden said. They pointed out that the Taliban beats women in public for the slightest infractions of strict Sharia law. They also pointed out that girls were denied education and women were often denied medical care because male doctors could not touch female patients, and women could not become doctors because they were not allowed to be educated as medical doctors.

Oh, but we are not like that, “We want our women to get an education, so they can be anything they want to be.” But the fundamentalist SBC pastors say, “Ahhh, but you know, a woman’s role is really in the home, and women should not work outside the home. The Bible says that the husband is to be the provider and the wife is to raise the kids and do the laundry.”  How long will it be before they discover that you do not really need an education to do that?

I heard on the news that in Saudi Arabia school kids are still being taught that women are weak and irresponsible.

Oh, but we are not like that, “It’s the Bible that tells us that women are weak and need a leader husband to rule over her. The Bible says it, we just do it. Don’t blame us.” John MacArthur9 male headship megachurch pastor of Grace Community Church in California says that a woman, because of her weakness, needs a man to be her head.

There is a church a few miles from my home that gives a packet to visitors. Inside this visitors packet is the Baptist Faith and Message 2000. Now the BF&M 2000 says lots of things, but the pastor doesn’t really want you to wade through all that. All he really wants to tell you is that women cannot be pastors, nor can women be deacons in their church, and he wants you to know that wives should graciously submit to their husbands.

I wonder what pastors think when they read in the Houston Chronicle about the Taliban and how they treat women. I wonder what they think when they hear that in Saudi Arabia school kids are learning that women are weak and irresponsible. Don’t they see that they teach the same thing?

Yes! Our Christian and government leaders want us to be exactly like that.

We have a milder case of the Taliban’s awful disease against women, but we have the same disease. And it is spread in your local church (and now our government )every Sunday.

Will you speak up for women? Join me in speaking up against all mistreatment of women in the church, and against churches that relish in promoting women as second-class Christians?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Affirmations #7, #8, #9, #10

Posted on August 20, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

In these last Affirmations we finally come to the end of the misogynist document. And no, the Danvers Statement was not written in the interest of integrity to the Scriptures. It was written expressly to keep women in their places in the church and home after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave white women the same rights that white men already had.

Affirmation #7. Wifey is supposed to determine if he is asking her to sin (paraphrased here as all are. Read the Concerns and Affirmations on http://www.cbmw.org website.)

My Response. According to the CBMW, the woman is supposed to determine if her leader-husband is asking her to sin. This puts no accountability on the husband. It all becomes her problem. This woman who has to be led, now has to be able to recognize and determine if what she is being led to do is a sin. And it is up to her to say “no.”

This Affirmation is really strange in that it contradicts “male headship” because it puts a limit on what males can demand. They say that wives are exempt from engaging in sinful demands by their husbands. However, the very word and concept of male headship is that males make the rules for their wives, and they set the parameters for female obedience.

This is affirmed by Dorothy Patterson, one of the founders of CBMW and the wife of Paige Patterson who is also a founder of CBMW, when she said, “As a woman standing under the authority of Scripture, even when it comes to submitting to my husband when I know he’s wrong, I just have to do it, and then he stands accountable at the judgment.” From Dorothy Patterson’s statement, it appears that she must follow her husband into sin if that is what he asks of her.

Their Affirmation #8. If a woman claims she is called to preach, she can’t set aside church doctrine to do so, and must say “No” to God who called her.

My Response. If a woman is called to preach or serve in some other leadership capacity, she must deny that call because, according to the Council, God cannot call a woman to preach. Men are never called upon to set aside their heartfelt sense of a call because of their gender.

Their Affirmation #9.  Now they are worried that they may have limited women too much because who else is going out help those who are ill, and the miseries of sickness, malnutrition, homelessness, illiteracy, ignorance, aging, addiction, crime, incarceration, neuroses, and loneliness (yes, they list all of these) of this “fallen world.”

My Response. Look at the hypocrisy and condescending attitude here. They are willing to allow women to go out into the gutters of the streets where the homeless, drug addicts, and criminals are, but will not allow them to serve behind the safety of a pulpit.

They will send women to foreign mission fields where the people are often darker and do not speak the same language. A woman said after the SBC missionary commissioning service of her granddaughter, “How can they send girls out to these dangerous places?” Yet they do. But they will keep the white, English-speaking churches for males here in the U.S.

Jesus saw the whole world as a field to harvest, and called for laborers. Then he said to his disciples, “The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field” (Matthew 9:37).

The Council finds it all right to send women missionaries to dangerous places in the world, even though they teach that women are unable to protect their families or themselves. It is a testimony to women and their love for God that they are willing to serve wherever they are called. It is a testimony against restrictive churches that decide that women can only be called to serve in a church far away from their homes and families.

Affirmation #10. Same old, same old. Women are causing increasingly destructive consequences families, churches and culture.

My Response. According to the Danvers Statement written by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, whatever happens to families, churches, and culture depends upon the willful decision that women make of whether or not they will submit to male domination. In their prediction, any decision other than to submit to male domination will lead to the destruction: 1) of the authority of scripture; 2) of the home; 3) of the church; 4) of worship; 5) of Bible translations; 6) and of the gospel. This is found on their website under Mission and Vision.

This is the end of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood’s signature statement “The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.” Thank God. I am tired of reading this crap over and over. (And no, the Danvers Statement was not written in the interest of integrity to the Scriptures. It was written expressly to keep women in their places in the church and home after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave white women the same rights that white men already had).

Shirley Taylor Books (available on Amazon in print and on Kindle)
The Biblical Marriage Myth: The Devil Comes Calling
The Power of a Book: The Street Evangelist
Raising the Hood: A Christian Look at Manhood and Womanhood
Women Equal – No Buts: Powered by the Same Source
Dethroning Male Headship: 2nd Edition
From Wife to Widow: What I Know Now

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Affirmation #6. Redemption in Christ

Posted on August 17, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

We get to their Affirmation #6. Seeking to be holy, they finally bring Christ into the picture. They use holy speak of Redemption in Christ. This is the only one of their Affirmations about Jesus, and they get this one wrong, too. Of course they go back to the famous “Fall” mentioned in Genesis and the curse. Oh my gosh, you gotta laugh at the contortions they go through to justify denying women their full humanity before God and their full salvation thru Christ.

As explained previously, this is the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood’s signature statement which they call The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. This is one of the most misogynistic documents in modern Christianity. However, the Southern Baptist Convention half wrote it and endorses it and they teach it in their seminaries, and other entities have adopted it. This post is a continuation of my explanation (using a little fun because you gotta laugh).

Their Affirmation #6 has three parts to their “Redemption in Christ” and aims at removing the distortions introduced by the curse.

My Response to Part #1. That is a made-up, distorted theology. Redemption in Christ has nothing to do with male and female relationships. Redemption is about healing both men’s and women’s relationship to God.

Part #2. Husbands should love their wives and women should be happy to submit and let hubby do all the family stuff.

My Response to Part #2. A better statement by the Council would have simply read: “Husbands and wives should respect and love each other and raise their children to love the Lord, as they themselves do.” However, they did not do that. That would have endorsed female equality and would have negated the entire Danvers Statement. So let’s continue with what they did say.

The simple reading of these scriptures instructs wives to submit to their husbands. The Council apparently realized there was a problem with this and decided to pretty it up. Leadership is not mentioned in the scriptures they give. And, even though men are told to love their wives and not harm them, in actuality, a husband can be in love with his wife and still physically and emotionally harm her.

Another problem is that these scriptures do not instruct women in how to accept the authority of her husband, which is not surprising since these scriptures do not give a husband authority.

For centuries men have allowed no exceptions to these scriptures, and if these scriptures are followed as written, it means wives are to submit to their husbands in any and all situations, and to any and all men who are husbands, redeemed or not, and harsh or not.

Men and governments have used these scriptures against women and have allowed wives to be abused, both physically and mentally. Many husbands who do not even attend church, abuse their wives based on these scriptures. There are instances of pastors telling women that they must submit to certain levels of abuse, including physical abuse, because women are to submit to their husbands, redeemed or not.

Wives do not need to be under the authority of a husband-leader. What man wants a wife-child as a companion? The woman Adam was given in the Garden was a companion fully grown and fully responsible. It is our children who need leaders—the leadership of both mothers and fathers.

Part #3. Guess what! Women can receive salvation and go to heaven, too! Guess What again! She can do everything in church that a man won’t do.

My Response. They do not deny that women can receive salvation; it is just that women’s salvation comes with restrictions. According to Bruce Ware, a woman’s salvation comes first by accepting the “role” he says God gave her, and then by accepting God.4

This is where they tell women that they cannot do this and cannot do that in church. Of course each church decides exactly what this and that means. One rule of thumb is to see what the church considers “important” work, and that is for men; the rest can be done by either women or men.

Next Blog: Affirmation #7, #8, #9, #10. Wifey is supposed to determine if he is asking her to sin and other stuff

Shirley Taylor Books (available on Amazon in print and on Kindle)
The Biblical Marriage Myth: The Devil Comes Calling
The Power of a Book: The Street Evangelist
Raising the Hood: A Christian Look at Manhood and Womanhood
Women Equal – No Buts: Powered by the Same Source
Dethroning Male Headship: 2nd Edition
From Wife to Widow: What I Know Now

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Their Affirmation #5. Adam was created first, and that is the only thing he had going for him

Posted on August 15, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

Here we are at their Affirmation #5 and it has to be one of their most ridiculous. Well, truthfully all 10 of them qualify for most ridiculous, but this one does take the cake. It is all about visible genitalia, of course. Men have it, women don’t. Thus, men are by anatomy given the role of leadership, headship, patriarchy, whatever name you want to call it. You might even call it a scam.

Their Affirmation #5 puts lipstick on a pig. According to the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood’s signature document “The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood,” where they claim “BOTH the Old Testament and the New Testament attest to the fact that even though both males and females have equal value,” it is the MALES that God chose as his earthly god to handle family and church. And, they even give texts for it! (All Affirmations are paraphrased. Read what they actually said at http://www.cbmw.org)

My response to their Affirmation. Well, of course that is one big distortion of all those texts, starting with Genesis and ending with Timothy. Adam was created first, and that is the only thing he had going for him. Is that enough? He demonstrated no loving, humble leadership, no bravery, no protection or support of Eve. Nothing—only that he got here first. There is not one example of headship in any of those verses they quote.

Colossians 3:18-25; 4:1 is a reminder for families to live in peace with one another: wives, husbands, children, slaves and masters (Colossians 3:15). The oft quoted Ephesians passage finds Paul having to tell the men to love their wives. Women have been told for centuries that they are the ones who must be pure and without stain (sexual sin) or wrinkle or any other blemish (Ephesians 5:27).

These men had to be commanded to simply love their wives as they would their own bodies, which meant they had not been doing a good job of loving their wives.

There is nothing about roles in those scriptures. Role is a word meaning to act a part in a particular situation. Roles can and do change. God did not assign roles. Man assigns roles depending upon what outcome is desired at the time.

According to the complementarian interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:11-12, men are not required to have any leadership qualification whatsoever; what a leader must have is male genitalia. That is not very flattering, and not what Christianity should be centered around.

Next Blog: Affirmation #6. Redemption in Christ

Shirley Taylor Books (available on Amazon in print and on Kindle)
The Biblical Marriage Myth: The Devil Comes Calling
The Power of a Book: The Street Evangelist
Raising the Hood: A Christian Look at Manhood and Womanhood
Women Equal – No Buts: Powered by the Same Source
Dethroning Male Headship: 2nd Edition
From Wife to Widow: What I Know Now

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Affirmation #4. Adam’s headship did not rise to the occasion

Posted on August 13, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood’s signature document The Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood’s Affirmation #4 (paraphrased, of course. Read the actual #4 at http://www.cbmw.org).

#4. They say that The Fall messed things up between men and women. As a result, now the husband’s humble headship leads to wanting to dominating women. Wifey’s willing submission results in her trying to wrest the authority from Hubby, or she may become a sullen servant. Oh, and lets not forget – Wifey may get tired of bringing casseroles and cleaning the kitchen at church and she might want to be IN LEADERSHIP.

My Response. They indicate men are wimps and blame it on the Fall. That is school-yard bullying. And they hope no one will notice that they are the ones who give men all the power, thus feeding men’s inclination to rule over women, even though it is common knowledge that power corrupts. They say that the relationship between men and women in the church is distorted because sin makes men love power or neglect their spiritual responsibility, and causes women to resist the limits man has placed upon them.

Neither before nor after the Fall, did Adam show any spiritual responsibility! He didn’t have to because he was not given any spiritual responsibility over Eve. Go back and read the scriptures. Adam and Eve were to subdue the animals together. Adam was not instructed to subdue his wife, nor was Eve instructed to follow his lead.

They could not find a scripture that backed up what they teach, but they used those scriptures anyway thinking no one would notice.

God said “Adam, where are you?” Silence from Adam as he and Eve hunker down beneath a fig tree. Finally, Adam says, “I heard you but I was afraid and I was naked. The woman you put here with me, she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.”

Try to find where Adam, from the time he was formed, demonstrated any spiritual responsibility. Eve did, though. She admitted to God, “The serpent deceived me and I ate.” Repentance. She did not blame Adam for not showing spiritual responsibility. She did not say that his loving, humble headship did not rise to the occasion.

Because Eve was a strong woman, one who shouldered the responsibility and repented of the sin, the church has used this against her ever since. Eve took charge. That is the distortion they are talking about. Men are to model themselves after Adam who ratted out his wife, hid with her, and acted like she was something that God had foisted upon him.

They want us to believe that Eve’s sin inclines women to resist being limited in their “roles.”  They are worried that women might want to use their spiritual gifts of leadership in preaching and pastoring. Their attitude diminishes both men and women. This teaching diminishes men by not holding them accountable for their actions (like Adam’s), and diminishes women by telling them that they cannot stand up and give spiritual leadership (like Eve did).

Next Blog: Affirmation #5. Adam was created first, and that is the only thing he had going for him

Shirley Taylor Books (available on Amazon in print and on Kindle)
The Biblical Marriage Myth: The Devil Comes Calling
The Power of a Book: The Street Evangelist
Raising the Hood: A Christian Look at Manhood and Womanhood
Women Equal – No Buts: Powered by the Same Source
Dethroning Male Headship: 2nd Edition
From Wife to Widow: What I Know Now

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Danvers Statement of Affirmations #1, #2, #3

Posted on August 11, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

Ready for this? Now we are going to discuss the second part of the Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. I have paraphrased each Affirmation and got to the essence of the Affirmation, just as I did with their Concerns. Read the full thing on their website http://www.cbmw.org. Here we go! They open with “Based on our understanding of Biblical teachings, we affirm the following:”

Their Affirmation #1.  Males and females were made in the image of God. But they are different.

My Response: What they do not tell us is why they feel male bodies are superior to female bodies, because if women and men are equal as persons, that means it is the physical male body that is distinctly superior. Make no mistake about it. They find the maleness of humanity superior.

Their Affirmation #2.  Everybody should know in their heart that the male body and female body is different and the male body is holier.

My Response. Thump, thump. The only echo here is when they tell us that men were created superior and women inferior. They have repeated it too many times. There is no justification for teaching that men were designed to have authority over women. The created order has nothing to do with it and is a red herring to make it sound good.

To nail down masculine roles is difficult and to nail down feminine roles is even harder. To simplify it, masculine roles are anything men desire to do, while women’s roles are what men have decided women can do.

Their Affirmation #3.  Adam’s headship in marriage. Good golly, Miss Molly. Marriage is all over the place in the Bible, and they know it. None of it is like ours is today. And thank God, ours is not like theirs is.

My Response. What cannot be found anywhere in the Bible is the scripture that explains why women need to be ruled over, either before or after the Fall. What also cannot be found in the scripture is where Adam was capable of ruling over a serpent, much less a woman. When they were given the task of subduing the creatures, Eve was right there beside Adam. As we know, Adam failed the very first task of subduing the serpent.

Next Blog: Affirmation #4. Adam’s headship did not rise to the occasion

Shirley Taylor Books (available on Amazon in print and on Kindle)
The Biblical Marriage Myth: The Devil Comes Calling
The Power of a Book: The Street Evangelist
Raising the Hood: A Christian Look at Manhood and Womanhood
Women Equal – No Buts: Powered by the Same Source

Dethroning Male Headship: 2nd Edition
From Wife to Widow: What I Know Now

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CBMW’S Concerns #7, #8, #9, #10

Posted on August 10, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

Somebody has to explain this in “plain English” and I have taken on that task. When biblical scholars start writing, only they know what they are saying and what it actually means. So let’s finish their 10 Concerns about how women are destroying families, government, sexuality, and religion. Please feel free to laugh out loud.

We can’t laugh too long, however, because Southern Baptist Convention seminaries and entities, and other religious organizations have signed on to this Danvers Statement on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood.

Their Concern #7: Say what? When you read their concern in their Statement, you will wonder who wrote this stuff. Find it on their website http://www.cbmw.org.

My response: This Concern is that some churches have begun ordaining women to roles in church leadership that men have always held – pastors, deacons, elders – and that somehow this will destroy the church.

The church is shrinking but it is not because of women being ordained. It is the status quo that is shrinking churches and a loss of spiritual vision. Ordaining women across all denominations would see a spiritual revival like has not been seen in recent memory.

Their Concern #8: Hermeneutical oddities to trap people.

My Response: What they are saying is that the plain English reading of certain scriptures give men headship and authority over women (you can be assured that they are not concerned about any other scriptures). However, the scriptures they quote that they say gives man headship, are not supported by the Jesus who is found in the Gospels. There is no scripture, or quote, or action by Jesus that would back up the belief that men have headship over women.

Their concern #9. They want “ordinary people” to understand the scriptures, but ordinary people can’t even understand their wording in their Concern.

My Response. So, I will help them out here and explain what Concern #9 means. This Concern reinforces their belief that women are inferior to males, and claims that to say differently is a threat to Biblical authority. It is notable, again, that Jesus gave no indication of male superiority over females.

Their Concern #10.  “Winsone.” Who uses the word winsome? Well, they do and again it is unclear what they mean.

My Response: Again, the ailing culture, according to this Concern of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, is caused by women who desire to be equal. It appears to be important to bring back “the good ole days” and they call upon the Holy Spirit to put women in their place (to reform).

In this list of their 10 Concerns, the blame is placed on women who desire the equality given them by God and stolen from them by man. Women are painted as destroying churches, marriages, and the ideal culture, and therefore must be brought under control by the church and husbands. They have blamed women for every concern they list.

Next Blog: Their Affirmations

Shirley Taylor Books (available on Amazon in print and on Kindle)
The Biblical Marriage Myth: The Devil Comes Calling
The Power of a Book: The Street Evangelist
Raising the Hood: A Christian Look at Manhood and Womanhood
Women Equal – No Buts: Powered by the Same Source
Dethroning Male Headship: 2nd Edition
From Wife to Widow: What I Know Now

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Danvers Statement #6 “paying lip service to abuse”

Posted on August 8, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

“Wives, you must submit to your husbands.”

I wonder if Susie (name changed) heard those words as she sat in her Baptist church. By his own admission, her husband had slapped her a few times, no more than four or five. At least that is how many times he admitted to in the deposition just before his trial. “I love my wife,” he said, and “slapped her only seldom” during their 15 year marriage.

He even went to church with her on occasion. Before he killed her, that is. Even before their house burned down, giving him a big insurance payment with which he bought a tractor and some land with a pond.

It took six years before justice finally came for Susie. For years her death was classified as undetermined.

It was a Saturday and Susie had been washing windows on her day off. In the afternoon, her mother called her and they went shopping together. She got home about 6:30 p.m. Susie’s husband arrived shortly afterwards and he ordered pizza delivered. Suddenly he told her he had to leave to check on something. According to him, when he returned he found Susie floating in his pond in their pasture. “Startled by a snake and fell in, choking on the pizza” was his explanation. Problem is, bodies do not float to the surface in 30 minutes. He would have had to search the bottom of the pond to find her, and would not have found her floating on the surface in that short time. He had no reason to assume she was in the pond as the pond banks were overgrown with weeds, and was not used.

A woman with a job like Susie’s leaves quite a sum of insurance upon her death. Her husband tried to claim the insurance, but the family knew someone who worked for a lawyer, and they brought in an attorney. Afterwards, there was a reclassification, and it was decided that Susie was murdered, and her husband was the prime suspect.

On their website, her church provides a link to the Baptist Faith and Message 2000, which reads:

“The husband and wife are of equal worth before God, since both are created in God’s image. The marriage relationship models the way God relates to His people. A husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church. He has the God-given responsibility to provide for, to protect, and to lead his family. A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ. She, being in the image of God as is her husband and thus equal to him, has the God-given responsibility to respect her husband and to serve as his helper in managing the household and nurturing the next generation.”

What if there is no servant leadership of her husband? What if he is planning to kill you and hopes to receive a big payout in insurance money? How do you know when the God-given responsibility to respect the husband is null and void? Just before you are murdered?

Her church named their food pantry after Susie. That made her parents happy. At the time her father was a deacon in a nearby Baptist church. I went to school with her mother.

A greater tribute to Susie would have been to amend the BF&M 2000 to say: “Husbands and wives have a God-given responsibility to respect, nurture, and care for each other.”

“You wouldn’t give yourself a black eye, so don’t give her one,” (Ephesians 5:28a my translation).

Concern #6: Now they are paying lip service to a concern about abuse. (Read how they actually phrased it on their website http://www.cbmw.org._

My response: Wives are responsible for being abused, both physically and emotionally IF one believes Bruce Ware, who is a Board Member of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood that wrote the Danvers Statement, when he said,

“And husbands on their parts, because they’re sinners, now respond to that threat to their authority either by being abusive, which is of course one of the ways men can respond when their authority is challenged—or, more commonly, to become passive, acquiescent, and simply not asserting the leadership they ought to as men in their homes and in churches.”

In that sentence, an excuse is given for physical (beatings) and emotional abuse against wives and mothers.

Next blog: Danvers Statement Concerns #7, #8, #9,#10

Shirley Taylor Books (available on Amazon in print and on Kindle)
The Biblical Marriage Myth: The Devil Comes Calling
The Power of a Book: The Street Evangelist
Raising the Hood: A Christian Look at Manhood and Womanhood
Women Equal – No Buts: Powered by the Same Source
Dethroning Male Headship: 2nd Edition
From Wife to Widow: What I Know Now

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment