Jumpstarter 2 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 2

He claims egalitarians have “skewered” complementarians for inconsistency—treating 1 Timothy 2 as creation-rooted and transcultural while treating 1 Corinthians 11 as merely cultural; what do you think makes Christians want to keep one “creation-based” command and explain away another, and how do you decide when that impulse is faithfulness versus self-protection?

Another way to ask: Why do you think Christians are tempted to treat one “creation-based” command as for all time but explain another one away as just cultural? How do you tell if you’re being faithful or just protecting yourself?

Direct Answer The transcript suggests Christians often “pick and choose” because some commands feel more acceptable or manageable, and that impulse becomes self-protection when we explain away texts simply to avoid looking extreme or losing standing.

Support from Transcript:

Finny says egalitarians accuse complementarians: “You all are not consistent… hypocrites,” because Paul appeals to creation in both 1 Timothy 2 and 1 Corinthians 11.
He quotes Rachel Evans: consistency would require that those who bind 1 Timothy 2 also “require women… to cover their heads.”
He quotes Craig Keener: “We take the argument as transcultually applicable in one case, but not so in the other. This seems very strange indeed.”
He calls the complementarian approach “picking and choosing… ‘we want to do this one… but not this one.’”
He warns that hypocrisy is “a vulnerable position… waiting to be unraveled,” and says recent decades have exposed that vulnerability.

Discussion Follow-ups Finny’s main test is consistency with Paul’s reasoning (creation, Trinity, angels, audience). Where do you feel tempted to protect yourself rather than submit to the text’s logic?

Jumpstarter 2 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 2 of 10