“I believe Miller’s views on the differences between maleness and femaleness place far too little emphasis on ontology. I believe her view of Genesis 3:16 is wrong (certainly not heresy though). I believe the view that anything a man does is by definition masculine and anything a woman does is by definition feminine to be peculiar at best.”
(Todd Pruitt – Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals) The Reformed-ish Twittershpere has been in high dudgeon since the release of Rachel Miller’s book Beyond Authority and Submission….
Mark Jones wrote a review of Miller’s book wherein he critiques what he believes are significant weaknesses. And then, to make matters a bit more interesting my friend Aimee Byrd posted a critique by Valerie Hobbs of Dr. Jones’ critique of Miller’s book. It all seems a bit confusing, I know.
Anyway, In recent days I have been inundated with questions and complaints and more complaints: “Are you going to respond to Rachel Miller’s book?” “Are Aimee’s views on gender the views of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals?” “I can’t believe you allowed something by Valerie Hobbs to be posted on MOS.” “Valerie Hobbs? Really? C’mon!” “Why are you so awesome?”
You get the picture. Okay, I made up the last one.
Here are a few initial thoughts in no particular order…
Research