Journal for Biblical Manhood & Womanhood

The Journal for Biblical Manhood & Womanhood (JBMW) is a theological journal that focuses on gender issues from a complementarian perspective. Last year I was hired as the editor of that journal, and the first issue for which I am responsible has just come back from the printer. I have made some changes in the format that I hope will open up the journal to a wider audience. I explain those changes in my editorial.

The current issue includes articles from John Piper, Mark Dever, Jim Hamilton, Ligon Duncan, and more. In addition to my editorial, two articles are available on the website for free: “Pursuing Manhood” by Ray Van Neste and “Women in Ministry: Practical Application of Biblical Teaching” by Randy Stinson and Chris Cowan. Both of these articles make for provocative reading, and I would be interested to hear your feedback on them.

One item that I would like to highlight in this issue is our new “Letters” section. I am excited about this new feature because of the forum it will open up with our readers. If you read the articles and want to write a response, I will consider it for publication in our next issue. Not only do I welcome feedback from those who agree with the theological position of the journal, I also welcome feedback from those who do not. In the current issue, egalitarian Kevin Giles contributes an extended response to a review of his book that appeared in a previous issue of JBMW. Chris Cowan follows with a brief response for the editors. For a fuller description of the contents of this issue, visit the journal’s website and read my editorial.

What can I say? I think this is a great journal, and I think you should read it. You can subscribe to JBMW at the journal’s website. I hope you will do so soon.

9 Responses to Journal for Biblical Manhood & Womanhood

  1. john April 30, 2008 at 8:15 am #

    I’m a complementarian because I find it to be the clear teaching of Scripture. However, I find articles such as the one written by Stinson/Cowan to be condescending toward women. When one asks, “What can we let women do in the church?” it sounds incredibly patronizing as if these women are our young children. And again I’m fully on board with complemetarianism having learned it from Grudem and Ware when both were at Trinity.

    I am sympathetic to the article’s stated goal of trying to help churches and pastors apply the Scripture. That’s noble and needed. But maybe in this one case it just should be avoided. Not because it is unbiblical or isn’t right to do but because it seems that it can’t be done in a winsome way.

    I’m sure that many will disagree, doubt my commitment to Scripture and my complementarian bona fides, but just read the article yourself and try to understand my point.

  2. Micah Carter April 30, 2008 at 9:12 am #

    Denny,

    I seem to hear, “Piper I know, and Dever I know. But who are you?”

    🙂

  3. Denny Burk April 30, 2008 at 9:24 am #

    Well, at least I wasn’t trying to cast out any demons!

  4. MatthewS April 30, 2008 at 9:45 am #

    Congrats! May you not suffer burnout keeping up with all you are doing.

    The interaction with those disagree is a great idea. I appreciate that you are doing that.

  5. jeremy z April 30, 2008 at 9:46 am #

    Denny great work. That is very cool you are the editor of this journal.

  6. Micah Carter April 30, 2008 at 2:23 pm #

    No, no, my friend! That reference was for me, the unassuming and humble shmoe lumped in with luminaries like Piper, Duncan, etc!

    I’m just gonna ride your coattail to glory!

  7. Barry April 30, 2008 at 3:58 pm #

    Denny,
    I just read the article by Ray. It’s great. I plan to use it in my classes. Good stuff!

    Barry

  8. Sue May 2, 2008 at 12:29 am #

    Denny,

    In the fall 2001, Mike Burer cowrote an article with Dan Wallace on Junia in which he said,

    “we will treat this name as feminine”

    They then proceeded to argue that Junia was only well-known to the apostles and not among the apostles.

    However, I see from the table of contents that Mike now thinks that Junia may really be Junias, masculine. And yet a year ago Mike told me he was planning to write an article defending the notion that Junia, fem. was well-known to the apostles.

    Can you tell me what has caused this about face?

  9. Sue May 2, 2008 at 12:31 am #

    PS I was invited to write a letter in response to Grudem in this issue, on kephale, but I regret that I did not get around to it.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes