What bugs each side

I want to add to David's preceding post. I think I'm seeing more clearly what it is that bugs each side (not that there are simply two) in this debate the most.

It bugs complementarians when people connect them with abuse, subordination of women, etc.

It bugs egalitarians when people suggest that they are not "biblical" or are working from a feminist agenda.

I'm sure I've over-simplified, but these are themes that I see coming up time and time again on this blog.

I wish that neither side would call themselves the "biblical" position, or at least I wish that each side would say "We believe our position is biblical, but we fully recognize that the other side believes they are more so." Of course, there are extremes of each position which are unbiblical, in the sense of subjugating, demeaning women, or of dismissing the value of men in women's lives, etc. But we must be careful not to caricature people when they are truly attempting to be biblical and follow Christ in the lives, marriages, churches, etc.

We can't resolve differences unless we quit thinking of the other side as unbiblical, when the other side is trying to be faithful to Scripture as they understand it. I know, for a fact, that there are complementarians and egalitarians, both, who do so.

Why don't we, on this blog, work even harder to stop judging the other side, and try to listen to each other, what each side believes supports their position.

No one has a monopoly on spirituality nor sin.

And it's not "all relative" either. I'm tired of hearing that, if you disagree with one position then you are accused of believing that "it's all relative".