I am not talking about re-writing history to replace facts with fiction. I am talking about telling the STORY – What Looks More Like Jesus? – Telling the Story through simple data facts that match the image of Jesus.
If a theological system consistently produces healthier marriages, greater mutuality, and stronger relationships, that fruit should matter when evaluating whether it reflects Christ.
Egalitarians and Complementarians agree on the authority of Scripture but disagree on the interpretation of several key passages concerning church leadership and marriage.
Considering the recent FRACTURE point in the Southern Baptist Church, and their resurgence of pushing women aside in the church, I have been researching the Danvers Statement that supports Complementarianism in the dissolution of God’s design.
By the grace of God, the Wesleyan church foundation that I am part of, not only calls out its core belief in equality for women and men and Egalitarianism, but they also have a position statement in support of women in ministry. In addition, in their most recent Annual Meeting, they called out specifically the support of women as leaders.
The Great Debate – Egalitarian vrs Complementarian
Which looks More Like Jesus?
Complementarianism although much older in theological theory, was officially founded in 1988. The purpose of this term came from a group that developed in response to feminism that began in the 1960’s and the growing Modern Movement of Egalitarianism established in 1984. The group is known as the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. They created the term Complementarianism to establish a new label for the traditional view that men and women are spiritually equal but have different, God-ordained roles—specifically, male headship and female submission in the home and church. Today, this groups belief corresponds with many church organizations that consider themselves complementarian, such as the Southern Baptist Convention.
Egalitarianism dates back as being practiced as far back as pre-historic days of gatherers and hunters. The term was formed in the Elightenment era in the 17 th and 18 th centuries. Codification of this term is found in the Declaration of Independence and the French Revolution Motto. The roots of groups that supported Egalitarianism also date back to this time-period. Feminism movement groups and women such as Catherine Booth (co-founder of the Salvation Army) provided a path to the group known as
Christians for Biblical Equality (CBE) which was formed in 1988.
Note: EQUALITY IN THE BIBLE is historically recognized as far back as Ancient Greece. The argument that women should not be leaders such as Pastors and Worship Leaders is just as old as church history.
The Egalitarian would argue that the Kingdom of God advances when the gifts of both men and women are fully utilized in ministry and leadership.
The Complementarian would argue that the Kingdom of God advances when the church obeys God’s revealed design for men and women.
I argue – What Looks More Like Jesus?
Danvers Statement vrs Egalitarian Response
The purpose of the Danvers Statement is to counter those who do not agree with their “convictions.” The group that created this statement is called the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. In their purpose, in summary, they claim sex is the problem. Not sex as in the act of sex, but sex as in female/male. They claim the need for their group is framed around the
idea of differences of masculinity and femininity. While the word equal does appear in their Affirmations, the presence of male headship is also present. The underlying ideology is male leadership and submission of the woman. They claim this is biblical order. The direct idea that this is a power grab for men is not directly revealed and is not considered a valid argument to
the Complementarian. Critics argue that Complementarian structures can unintentionally concentrate authority in male leadership and limit opportunities for women to exercise their gifts. Complementarians always claim equality. However, their “rationale” indicates otherwise and is even conflicting when equality is used in conjunction with the argument for
male leadership.
There are ten points of disagreement to their “Rationale”:
1. The widespread uncertainty and confusion in our culture regarding the complementary differences between masculinity and femininity;
Response: Scripture teaches that God intentionally created humanity as male and female (Genesis 1:27). Rather than seeing sex differences as accidental or oppressive, the Bible presents them as part of God’s good design. The text does not assign authority based on sex. The challenge for Christians is not to conform to cultural definitions of manhood and womanhood but to be transformed by God’s revelation (Romans 12:2).
2. The tragic effects of this confusion in unraveling the fabric of marriage woven by God out of the beautiful and diverse strands of manhood and womanhood;
Response: The biblical foundation of marriage is not hierarchy but partnership. In Genesis 2, The text presents mutual dependence, not authority and submission. Furthermore, Paul teaches that marriage reflects Christ and the church not through power structures but through self-giving love and mutual submission (Ephesians 5:21). Healthy marriages are not preserved by enforcing gender hierarchy but by embodying Christlike humility, service, sacrifice, and
shared stewardship.
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;
Response: The New Testament consistently challenges systems of status and privilege. Jesus taught that greatness is found not in authority but in servanthood (Mark 10:42-45). Egalitarianism does not reject biblical leadership; it rejects leadership based on sex. Scripture calls every Christian to exercise leadership through service and every Christian to submit to one another out of reverence for Christ (Ephesians 5:21). The harmony of marriage is not found in one spouse possessing final authority but in both partners seeking together the mind of Christ.
4. The widespread ambivalence regarding the values of motherhood, vocational homemaking, and the many ministries historically performed by women;
Response: Egalitarianism does not diminish motherhood; it rejects the idea that motherhood exhausts a woman’s calling. Scripture celebrates women who lead nations, conduct business, teach theology, prophesy, disciple believers, and advance God’s mission. Deborah judged Israel. Priscilla instructed Apollos. Phoebe served as a deacon. Junia was noted among the apostles. The biblical witness consistently portrays women as full participants in God’s work. The issue is not whether motherhood is valuable but whether women may freely follow all the callings God places on their lives.
5. The growing claims of legitimacy for sexual relationships which have Biblically and historically been considered illicit or perverse, and the increase in pornographic portrayal of human sexuality;
Response: The debate over women in ministry should not be conflated with debates about sexual ethics. Egalitarians and complementarians alike often affirm historic Christian teaching regarding marriage and sexuality. The question is not whether Scripture has moral boundaries but whether Scripture restricts leadership, teaching, and authority on the basis of sex. Connecting egalitarianism to broader sexual permissiveness risks creating guilt by association rather than addressing the actual biblical arguments.
6. The upsurge of physical and emotional abuse in the family;
Response: While abuse occurs across all theological traditions, hierarchical systems can create environments where abuse is more easily concealed, justified, or ignored. Whenever one spouse is taught to possess God-ordained authority and the other is taught to yield, the potential exists for that authority to be distorted. Jesus consistently used power to serve rather than control. Egalitarian marriages seek to reduce this imbalance by emphasizing mutual accountability, shared decision-making, and equal dignity before God. The gospel calls believers away from domination and toward partnership.
7. The emergence of roles for men and women in church leadership that do not conform to Biblical teaching but backfire in the crippling of Biblically faithful witness;
Response: The New Testament repeatedly shows God calling women into significant leadership roles. Women were the first witnesses of the resurrection. Philip’s daughters prophesied. Priscilla taught theology alongside her husband. Phoebe served the church as a deacon. Junia was recognized among the apostles. If the Holy Spirit distributes gifts without regard to sex (Acts 2:17-18; 1 Corinthians 12), the church should be cautious about imposing restrictions where God has not. Preventing gifted women from serving may itself hinder the church’s witness by refusing the gifts Christ has provided.
8. The increasing prevalence and acceptance of hermeneutical oddities devised to reinterpret apparently plain meanings of Biblical texts;
Response: The history of biblical interpretation demonstrates that apparent meanings are not always correct meanings. Christians once defended slavery, opposed interracial marriage, and resisted the education of women using texts they believed were plain and obvious. Faithful interpretation requires understanding context, language, culture, and the larger narrative of Scripture. Egalitarian scholarship does not seek to evade biblical authority but to understand difficult passages in light of the whole witness of Scripture and the redemptive movement of the gospel.
9. The consequent threat to Biblical authority as the clarity of Scripture is jeopardized and the accessibility of its meaning to ordinary people is withdrawn into the restricted realm of technical ingenuity;
Response: The authority of Scripture is not threatened when believers study it carefully; it is threatened when traditions are elevated above it. The Reformation itself challenged centuries of accepted interpretations by returning to the biblical text. Egalitarians affirm biblical authority precisely because they believe Scripture teaches the equal value, gifting, and calling of women and men. The issue is not whether Scripture is authoritative but whether inherited assumptions should be allowed to override evidence within Scripture itself.
10. And behind all this the apparent accommodation of some within the church to the spirit of the age at the expense of winsome, radical Biblical authenticity which in the power of the Holy Spirit may reform rather than reflect our ailing culture.
Response: The accusation of cultural accommodation cuts both ways. Throughout history, the church has often defended existing social hierarchies in the name of biblical faithfulness only to later recognize that it had confused cultural assumptions with God’s purposes. The question is not whether egalitarianism aligns with modern culture but whether it aligns with the trajectory of redemption revealed in Scripture. Jesus consistently elevated those marginalized by society. Pentecost empowered both sons and daughters. Paul proclaimed that in Christ there is neither male nor female (Galatians 3:28). The kingdom of God moves toward the restoration of partnership, mutuality, and shared participation in God’s mission. The church must ask whether restricting leadership by sex reflects that trajectory or resists it.
The deepest biblical response to all these concerns is not simply a defense of gender roles, marriage, or morality. It is the gospel itself. Human confusion, brokenness, and sin affect every area of life, including relationships, sexuality, family, and the church. Scripture points us ultimately to the redeeming work of Jesus Christ, who restores what sin has distorted and forms a people who increasingly reflect God’s good design for humanity.
While no single study settles a theological debate, the following findings suggest that marriages characterized by mutual partnership and shared decision-making often exhibit many of the relational qualities Christians associate with THRIVING marriages.
There is no irony that since sex is the topic, even though male/female is the “apparent” difference – the effects of the convictions of Complementarian when they are believed and practiced result in poor sexual outcomes!
It was found in the research for the Great Sex Rescue written by Sheila Gregoire, with co-authors Rebcca Lindenbach and Super Statistician (SS) Joanna Sawatzky that when a woman believes her husband has a tie breaking vote in their marriage, she is 45% more likely to say she doesn’t feel emotionally close to him during sex and 41% more likely to express dissatisfaction with her sex life compared with women who don’t believe the husband is the tiebreaker. The husbands seem to pick up on this, too. If a man is married to women who believes this idea, he is 40% more likely to say he doesn’t feel close during sex and 32% more likely to say he is not satisfied with their sex life.
Here is what a comprehensive data set shows for marriages that look like a real team practicing Egalitarianism, where the spouse’s believe in equality and mutual decision making:
So when you believe that you’re part of a team with your spouse, all of these other good outcomes are more likely to happen.
For instance, when she feels like she’s a team with her husband:
- She is 15.96 times more likely to say “my spouse knows how to help me when I’m stressed”
- She is 9.26 times more likely to say “I feel emotionally close during sex”
- He is 4.07 times more likely to say “I feel emotionally close during sex”
When he feels like he’s part of a team with his wife:
- He is 6.72 times more likely to say “I am satisfied with my sex life.”
- She is 4.06 times more likely to say “I know how to make my spouse laugh.”
- She is 1.48 times more likely to say “my level of sexual desire is high.”
Reference: https://baremarriage.com/2025/02/why-complementarianism-is-part-of-the-bad-outcomes-package/
So the question really isn’t about Complementarianism or Egalitarianism. The question, is – What looks more like Jesus?
The ultimate question is not whether a church identifies as Egalitarian or Complementarian. The question is whether its understanding of leadership, authority, and service reflects the character of Jesus.
Jesus consistently elevated the marginalized, welcomed women as disciples, and taught that greatness in God’s kingdom is expressed through service rather than power. Whatever position one holds on gender roles, Christians should ask whether their practice produces the fruit of Christlike love, mutual honor, human Thriving, and faithful discipleship.
Theology matters. But so does fruit. Jesus taught that a tree is known by its fruit. If a theological system consistently cultivates relationships marked by love, mutuality, dignity, and spiritual growth, that fruit deserves careful consideration as the church seeks to embody the Kingdom of God.
What Looks More Like Jesus?