I'm reading Women and Men in Ministry by Robert Saucy and Judith TenElshof.

This book is driving me batty. Ultimately, on some things, I kind of agree. But the way in which they reach these conclusions is infuriating. In one paragraph they will say "egalitarians [blanket statement] assume that this text implies this. It is not necessary to infer that." And in the next, they'll infer their own tenuous translational idiocy. It retrojects the idea of "ministry teams" and counseling ministries onto the first century church (and before). It makes use of some scholarship I find questionable -- as well as avoiding scholarship it would have been helpful to see it dispute.

I'm having to read it slowly, though, contrary to my normal pace to allow for the periodic outbursts of rage and/or logic.

I think I've been here before: I've got some huge questions, but there's no one to ask.