Response to the response of Aimee Byrd

I was recently introduced to Aimee Byrd via a twitter post that decried her teaching (or preaching) at a church. Byrd is a blogger who writes on evangelical subjects. Some of her twitter critics pointed out that it was only a matter of time before she moved from the blogosphere and into the pulpit. Obviously, proof received of such a deed was only confirmation of a person who was headed off the rails of Christianity and into the deep bog of apostasy.

Byrd, a prolific writer, responded to her critics with an article designed to shed light on her shift from complementarian thinking to egalitarianism. In today’s podcast, I examine her post and provide my thoughts as I react to her writing. I want to note that the only reason I am interested in Byrd’s work at all is because I am interested in any egalitarian arguments. Her post can be found here:

https://aimeebyrd.com/2022/03/10/that-was-then-this-is-now/#more-1301

The link to my podcast is here:

2 comments

  1. Hi Chairistotle…

    I listened to about half of your podcast about Aimee…

    I have been reading her blog off and on for a couple of years.
    In the beginning of your podcast you state something like…
    “This is the first you have heard of Aimee Byrd.”
    And it was through a Twitter discussion.

    You go on to talk about…
    “She “discovered” that “they hold the subjugation of women higher than orthodox trinitarianism.” She found that “they value Danvers over Nicene.” “They demand that she publicly answer questions made by anonymous men, or lose her job.”

    And said “That’s a bold claim which is pretty hard to prove.”

    You then say, “She does supply some links….
    …But I’m NOT going to follow them out.”

    I’m just suggesting it might be a good idea to “Follow some of those Links.”
    And take a peek so you can see a little bit more about Aimee.
    Search her site a little more to see what Aimee has gone thru.

    Whether you agree with her theology or NOT…

    Some “Links” are about the debate about the “Trinity”

    Some “leaders,” “pastors,” were promoting the “Trinity,” as
    ESS – The Eternal Subordination of the Son.
    Which, it seems, many have a different opinion.

    Aimee wrote..
    “One great consequence of the Trinity Debate of 2016, which started over the issue of CBMW leaders teaching an ontological, eternal subordination of the Son to the Father (ESS/ERAS) and then applying that to men and women, is a resurgence of classical teaching on the Trinity and on the importance of biblical theology over and against Biblicism. However, even as the overwhelming consensus was that those who teach ESS are not in line with confessional Nicene trinitarianism, there never was any retraction of the teaching from CBMW or the from leaders who taught it.”

    “discovered”
    Dealing with – ESS – The Eternal Subordination of the Son.

    “subjugation of women”
    Dealing with – ESS – The Eternal Subordination of the Son.
    ———-

    And some “Links” are about how she was “treated” (badly)
    by different groups in the OPC as she tried to solve these differences.

    They “turn her out “of her own denomination by enabling their leaders
    **to openly revile her,**
    leaving her unprotected and traumatized
    by the whole process of asking for help.

    Here is an article from Christianity Today.

    Google
    “How a Reformed Facebook Group’s Private Comments Turned Into a Public Dispute”

    Be blessed in your walk with the Lord

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s