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

Danvers Statement #4 and #5

Posted on August 7, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

Danvers Statement #4 and #5

Their 4th concern is pure bonkers. They are concerned that women will not want to be mothers or homemakers or  – and this one is really important – will not want to be unpaid volunteers in the church. (Note: I have paraphrased all their Concerns and Affirmations. Read what they actually say on their website http://www.cbmw.org.)

My response:

This Concern is that women will not want to be stay-at-home mothers and church volunteers. What they are saying is that a woman’s place is in the home and not in the workplace or in church leadership. Vocational homemaking means it is Momma’s main occupation, especially regarded as particularly worthy and requiring great dedication.

What they do not say is that women who work outside the home are also vocational homemakers, in addition to spending many hours volunteering in the church. Ignored is the fact that these working mothers are often the difference between hungry children and fed children.

Their #5. Women are blamed on the rise in homosexuality

My response:

At first reading this would not appear to have women as the basis of their Concern. However, the rise in homosexuality (perverse relationship) is blamed on women by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, as is found on their website: “Egalitarianism and Homosexuality. It is increasingly and painfully clear that Biblical feminism is an unwitting partner in unraveling the fabric of complementary manhood and womanhood that provides the foundation not only for Biblical marriage and Biblical church order, but also for heterosexuality itself.” See, I told you.

Reread that sentence above. This is what it says: women who desire equality are destroying marriages, churches, and heterosexuality. Why is it that women are blamed for destroying marriages and churches, without the complicity of males? How can women destroy heterosexuality? The apostle Paul was not as harsh as this! Also, we can see that it is pastors themselves who are indulging in pornographic portrayals of the church.

Next blog: Danvers Statement Concerns #6 and #7

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

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

Dissecting the Danvers Statement. Concerns #1 thru #3

Posted on August 6, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

Remember when Adam said, ““The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.” Yep, he ate it and therein women have been blamed for man’s failures ever since, and the Danvers Statement is no exception. There are 10 Concerns and 10 Affirmations in their Danvers Statement and EVERY ONE of them blame women. “The woman made me do it.” Read their Danvers Statement on their website http://www.cbmw.org.

I have paraphrased their Concerns and Affirmations because some are so difficult to wrap your brain around, they must be spelled out.

Concern #1: Right off the bat, their first concern is that people don’t understand the complementary differences between masculinity and femininity.

My reply: Actually, there is no uncertainly and confusion regarding men and women. Culture has changed, and no culture has ever been the perfect one, certainly not 2000 years ago. When this Danvers Statement was written in 1987, women had recently been given the right to serve on juries, to have credit in their names, to buy and sell a house in their own names, to make legal decisions, and to work in what was previously male dominated fields.

These are rights we take for granted in 2026, but were denied women before the Civil Rights Act of 1964. During the 20 years before the Danvers Statement was written, women had to fight their way through the courts to attain these rights that were legally theirs, and it was cases of women winning this struggle that brought on the Danvers Statement. Some churches were even ordaining women! They desired to put a stop to women advancing in the educational and religious sectors.

Note: Christian Nationalism is hell-bent on rescinding those basic American rights for women.

Concern #2: Now, their second concern, we find them crying over this so-called confusion, saying it is destroying marriage and manhood and womanhood.

Me: Oh my, that sounds awful, but wait. See what I have got to say about their tears.

My reply: They saw women attaining higher education and now, by law, they could not be denied jobs based on their gender. This caused their fear that women would forget what they saw as a “woman’s place” in the home, and under the control of their husbands. When women became supervisors over men, or held any position that gave them authority over men, the writers of the Danvers Statement decided those actions were destroying marriages.

They were worried that women who had supervised men in the workplace during the day would not be content to be submissive wives when they came home at night.

Let’s look at one more.

Concern #3 scares them of feminism! And these are the men who are supposed to chase the devil awa and they are scared to death of a little bit of feminism.

My reply: The word feminism still carries a negative reaction in the Christian and secular world. This explosive word “feminist” was used deliberately to associate abortion with egalitarians, even though many egalitarians do not approve of abortion.

They use the phrase “glad harmony” which completely ignores the fact that the Bible says nothing about “glad harmony” in marriage. The Apostle Paul stopped in the middle of his discourse in Ephesians 5 to tell husbands they should love their wives and to treat their wives like they would their own body – in other words, feed and care for her and not abuse her. Glad harmony – hardly!

This Concern #3 is the perfect description of a one-way marriage—his way. Everything she does is to support him and build him up. However, if he is the spiritual leader, it would appear that it is his job to build up and support his wife, not the other way around.

Next blog: Danvers Statement Concerns #4 and #5

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

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Blatant Misogyny

Posted on August 4, 2026 by bwebaptistwomenforequality

The CBMW was founded in order to support male headship and male authority, and women’s submission to that authority.

An example is found in Number 3 of their Danvers Statement Concerns, where we see they live in a fantasy world where all “redeemed” husbands give “loving, humble leadership” to their “redeemed” wives.

3.) The increasing promotion given to feminist egalitarianism with accompanying distortions or neglect of the glad harmony portrayed in Scripture between the loving, humble, leadership of redeemed husbands and the intelligent, willing, support of that leadership by redeemed wives.

I guess that if I had a chance to ask CBMW why they are so emphatic that “redeemed” wives are to “support” their husbands, I would pose this question: “If hubby is the God-ordained leader of the family, why isn’t he offering mental and physical support to his wife who is obviously in need of being led?” Nope, they say she is the one who is supposed to support him. LOL. You can’t make this stuff up. It is right there and they are proud of it.

From the beginning of the Danvers Statement, (found on the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood website (CBMW under tab About) one can see it diverging from biblical truths, based upon CBMW’s biases and interpretations. Certainly there are differences in men and women other than anatomical differences. The Bible is not concerned with masculine and feminine traits. Jesus never mentions these inborn differences. God Himself is described with both father and mother characteristics. In the New Testament, Jesus is concerned with the heart – not masculinity, not femininity, and certainly not genitalia.

Much has been written exposing the fallacies of the Danvers Statement. However, it does not take a Bible scholar to see the misogyny presented in the Danvers Statement. In reading the Concerns and Affirmations, it is clear that this is a cultural document that denies the modern age in preference to biblical times with emphasis on restrictions against women.

Scriptures have been added to the document in an attempt to justify the return of families to the First Century. A clear reading of the scriptures does not justify male domination over females as a commandment law. It cannot. Jesus made one new law and it was not about male/female leadership, but about equality in loving each other: “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another” (John 13:34).

Each point in the Danvers Statement begins with their belief that women are responsible for the breakdown of family, of culture, and Christianity itself, and reinforces their teaching that males were created at Creation to dominate and lead women.

Next blog: Let’s dissect the Danvers Statement a little bit

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