Karen was “complaining” that while I featured a sermon by Paul Washer on Biblical Manhood, I didn’t post one on Biblical Womanhood.
So here’s one, sisters, where Pastor Voddie Baucham exposits Titus 2:3-5 to teach about Biblical Womanhood, and which I pray will edify you.
If you wish to view this later, you can access it at the playlist I made at YouTube.
Similar Posts:
- This Is For the Men
- The Purpose of Marriage
- We’re Losing It!
- Answering the Age-Old Question: Why Do Bad Things Happen?
- Make War! (Otherwise Titled “Beat Up That Sermon”)
Tags: Children, Feminism, Greco-Roman, Home, Love, Paul Washer, Sermon, Voddie Baucham, Womanhood
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link
http://wordnverse.com/2008/08/23/biblical-womanhood/trackback/
August 25, 2008 at 18:07
Dan King
I love Voddie! He is such a great teacher…
However, I think that Oakland guy that you also have featured on you YouTube page is a hack. Not that I am defending the emergent church practices that he attacks, but he often does EXACTLY what he accuses them of doing. And tends to pick and choose verses to support his viewpoint rather than base his arguments on sound exigetical study. Like I said, I’m not trying to defend the emergent folks, but I am REALLY not impressed with how Oakland makes his case.
August 26, 2008 at 10:02
Isaiah
I just ‘discovered’ Voddie and his sermons. Am I slow or what?!
Thanks for sharing, Dan. I haven’t really followed Roger Oakland’s ministry much, but his talk on the Emergent movement there was quite on the money, IMHO. I have yet to read his book on the subject though; it’s still on my “wanted” list.
August 26, 2008 at 13:04
Dan King
Yeah, I’ve heard Voodie speak several times, and he is an incredible speaker, and speaks based on sound exegetical study.
I guess that is where my problem with Oakland is. It is not so much with his message, but more the fact that his Bible interpretations is EXTREMELY shallow. It is simply way too easy to poke holes through his arguements. The funny thing is that while using poor exegetical skills, he accuses the emergent folks of not interpreting the scriptures properly.
Like I said, I don’t disagree with the intent of his message… I also disagree with many of the practices of the emergent folks. However, they are raising some important questions that should be taken seriously.
I guess that I also think that we would be better off trying to dialogue with them over the issues that they raise, rather than attacking them. There are bigger fish to fry that need direct attack… just my humble opinion…
August 30, 2008 at 9:31
Isaiah
Dan,
I’d agree with you on the Emergent movement to a certain point — their initial messages and the social works they encouraged. Other than that, all their teachings need to be examined under the light of Scripture and unfortunately, most do not make the mark and need to be utterly rejected.
Bringing in New Age practices like yoga and contemplative prayers and other ilk is a big no-no.
I think some already do try to dialogue with them on a regular basis, but as with many Christian debates, neither side is willing to listen to and accept the other side’s stance.
Ultimately I stand by Sola Scriptura and the other 4 Solas. Unfortunately, Mr. Velvet Elvis himself rejects these tenets of the Christian faith and this is where I’ll have to stand firm on the side of God and totally reject his teachings.
While it’s true that we’ll never always fully agree with a teacher (since all of us are human), I am careful to note if the teacher has more bad teachings than Scriptural ones or the other way round. If it’s the former, I’ll stop listening to him totally — it’s obviously a whole lotta poison laced with some truths to make it palatable to the less-discerning.