Sunday, April 18, 2010

Complementarian is “Thievarian”

Complement: That which completes or makes perfect; either of two parts or things needed to complete each other.

Complementary: Completing; supplying a deficiency

Complementary colors: Primary or secondary colors in the spectrum which, when combined, make another color.

~The Living Webster Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language

According to Webster, the parts that complement one another complete one another or make a different color together. They are not first changed into something less than or more than they first were in order to make the completeness work.

The husband and wife are to be joined together and become a unit. That’s somewhat like red and blue joining together to make purple.

But the way the Complementarians teach it, the red must first become less red and give her strong pigment to the blue. She becomes light pink. The blue takes the deepest red pigment as his own and becomes a dark blue. The two never become a blended color. Instead the blue becomes dominant blue and the red becomes washed out pink.

Like sheets of paper, the dark blue moves over the pink, eliminating her input and hiding her from view—except as his servant whose focus is to help him reach his goals. The two appear to be 90%-100% the husband.

In reality they have remained two people, two colors. They have not blended at all. Instead the power of the red was taken from her and given to the blue. The red is denied power of choosing what is best for either herself, her husband, or her children, denied the power of developing her interests in any sphere accept that allowed and dictated by the dominating blue.

The real essence of the red is either destroyed or frozen.

Meanwhile, the blue steals the power of decision-making, the power of following God’s direction from the red and takes it for his own personal use.

The two can never become a new blended entity, because a large part of the red has been stolen from her and is controlled by the blue. Since red has lost control of her future, her choices, her preferences, her gifts, and her personality, she has too little left to blend with the original blue color. If she tries to blend the washed out pink she has left into the dark blue over which she has no control, she will be obliterated and destroyed, and her husband will become double his size and rise up like a giant dark blue Goliath. Because none of her red essence or choice will be allowed to impact the corrupted Goliath, their union of red and blue can never make purple.

Instead of two becoming a blended purple unit, the two become a more prominent blue.

In order for a husband and wife to become one, they must each have full control over their own being, and not yield that control to their spouse. Each person and his/her input must be valued highly and equally for their red and blue to become purple.

To complete one another, each person and his/her input must be valued highly and equally. If one takes a large portion away from the other by taking authority over her or demanding that she give her authority away, instead of being completed, he has been corrupted. And the wife from whom a large portion has been stolen, is also not completed, but diminished to the point of annihilation.

There is no way an enlarged corrupted man can blend with a non-entity wife to make a more complete new organism. Instead of becoming more valuable, both individuals become less valuable because he is corrupted and she is reduced to child-slave status. Instead of becoming a new, blended, different color, they become a darker his color. As a “unit,” they become the dominant partner—who is corrupted.

Indeed, in male authority, female submission marriages, neither person is completed. They are not Complementarian.

Since husbands are taught to be thieves and steal freedom of choice from their wives, and wives are taught to offer their valuable freedom of choice to their husbands to be stolen, a more accurate name would be Thievarian.

Waneta Dawn is the author of "Behind the Hedge," a novel about a wife who discovers traditional marriage advice doesn't always work. See


  1. Waneta, I have gone to reading the Wycliffe Bible now, after reading it, it Was the first English translation, I find it interesting that he did [he and the translater] and also the Armenians did NOT take out, the books of the old Canon [from Latin Vulgate] and it was Tyndale and Calvin and Luther that Did change, omit, and twist certain texts. God lead me to read the Wycliffe, I was SHOCKED,

    to see, the subtle differences and one I did notice yesterday, was when the first English Bible says,

    the two will join and become TWO in ONE flesh,

    not one.

    I have been seeing Tons of differences like this in scriptures having to do with Women, and also the books that are ABout women, Judith, Susanna, that Luther-Calvin took OUT. And the book of Baruch or Baruck,

    my husband always says [he is Jew] Baruck Adonai, [sic]

    Baruck in OT, in the New Jerusalem Bible and in Wycliffe, is similar to Proverbs in the SHE voice.

    Anyway, I thought I'd relay this to you...I am getting a Wycliffe for Mother's Day and a New Jerusalem Bible Lord Willing, for now reading online--it's like Boom, a Breath of fresh air and the Anointing is all over it when I read. I love how the first translation [without the harsh misogynist language] uses soothing and soothly,

    because it really is Soothing, to read the Word of God, and to be Soothed while reading all scriptures that deal with Women, I compared the KJV and Wycliffe yesterday,

    I felt like a new woman reading. I am Convinced, that the translations, were Deliberately, tainted with misogynist the Same time, the lust for gold and mammon...Just like in OT, took hold.

    I am convinced. Love, Jane

  2. Jane,
    Thanks for sharing. I checked Wycliffe, Ephesians 5 online, and indeed it spoke of two in one flesh.

    That is always how I understood the passage, but the comps teach that the two shall become the man--apparently. If they don't teach it, this is still the result in many comp marriages.

    The harm this misapplication does to both men and women is far-reaching. Instead of growing spiritually and showing more of the fruit of the Spirit, males show less and less, until they show none at all. Meanwhile, wives yield more and more of themselves to be ruled by a tyrant and get swallowed, not by the Holy Spirit, but by their carnal husbands, who are controlled by Satan. In their effort to obey Christ, wives end up obeying Satan.

    It is Satan's back-door strategy.

    Which Wycliffe version are you getting? The original reads very hard. Is the smoothed out Wycliffe version faithful to the original? I didn't have time to check in depth.

    You said, "I am Convinced, that the translations, were Deliberately, tainted with misogynist leanings..."

    I have been so trained to give others the benefit of the doubt, that I have a hard time coming to this conclusion. Only recenly have I finally concluded that most abusers are most likely NOT bound for Heaven, since Jesus said we would know them by their fruit and they do not have the fruit of the Spirit, and other passages say similar things. I have a hard time concluding that translators were that evil. At this point, I lean toward thinking that their belief systems caused them to reject certain translations and embrace others.

    For example, in the Wycliffe version, the last verse of Eph 5, the wife is told to "dread" her husband. Surely, dread didn't mean then what it means today! If it did, why would ANY wife EVER marry? Because of economic need alone? Because she wanted children? If so, a husband could be viewed as a necessary evil, and the expectation of soul-mate love would be out of the question. Unless a husband's "love" was mere "take care of the needs of your wife."