|
Post by gardener on Aug 25, 2006 22:01:38 GMT -5
Belove I'm not being ridiculous I'm only telling you the truth. You have came up with your own ideal of what you think a woman should be. And i didn't call God weak you are putting words in my mouth. If Jesus is sensitive so be it, but he is far from weak. You have your own opinions but none of them come from the bible, you have your own liberal interpretation of them but that is not the truth:
Corinthians 11:33Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
Corinthians 11:6-7If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. 7A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.
Timothy 2:11-14 Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
Ephesians 5:22-24Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the Saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.
I Corinthians 14:34-35Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Genesis 3:16Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
I don't want to argue about this with you anymore, i knew i was right, but you must have had no ideal. i already told you i accept the way it is now, but this is not the way of the Lord. This is man's way. And you have your own interpretation of equality of man and woman. But man IS superior(the way God made it) and Woman IS to be his servant. Its all right in front of your eyes above, if you want to keep arguing about this we can, but I know for a fact i'm right, i just hope it doesn't damage any friendship.
|
|
|
Post by setfree on Aug 26, 2006 13:10:50 GMT -5
I don't see anyone practicing covering their heads in church today. This is mans tradition, not God's law. You have to remember that when Paul was writing letters to the churches in the 1st century that he was responding to certain situations in those particular churches. Jesus said somewhere that there would be no new laws that he would put on anyone and you cannot find in the Old Testement the kind of things that are sometimes stated in the New Testement concerning women. That leads me to believe that what was written concerning women was an oppinion based upon men's traditions at the time and not God's Law. There are no new laws in the New Covenant (Testement) according to Jesus, just the law of love. So you cannot take Pauls writings as commandments unless they are also commandments in the O. T. Otherwise they are just opinions of someone that lived in an era where women were degraded unfairly.
My wife is right that a lot of what has been translated about women in the New Testement is based on men's traditions which produced wrong translations and misinterpretations. Women are equal with men. And as believers, according to scripture, both men and women have been placed on the same level as God (we are seated with Christ in heavenly places denotes equality by authority) by God himself. That doesn't make us God but he has made us his representatives here on earth and given us his authority, armour, character, gifts and righteousness. He gave that both to men and women. If women were inferior in God's sight or unable to teach, preach, serve God then he wouldn't have given them the same standing as men have as believers.
Setfreee
|
|
|
Post by setfree on Aug 26, 2006 13:36:09 GMT -5
gardener,
We are not Catholic and do not believe or agree with most of Catholic doctrine. We are not posting these things for a debate. This is not a debate board and if you do not subscribe to our beliefs then our beliefs cannot help you. That is what this board is for is to help and encouragemen and lead others on a path to freedom by helping them know who they are in Christ. That includes my wife's thread on what God really thinks of and intends for women's lives since many (but not all) in the church tell women that God considers them inferior, incapable beings who have no control over their own lives, when what God really desires is their service as fellow believers. God has a plan for every woman and man and it is impossible for us to fulfill our destinys if we are stuck in unbelief of who God says He is to us, and who we are to Him.
Our devotions are written to help others see themselves the way God sees them, see God the way He really is, and see others the way God desires us to see them. They also help us see through the devices of Satan to keep us in bondage to sin when Jesus already made us free. It is our hope and desire to help others become free, as we have become free, through God's Word from their addictions and strongholds so that they can all live the lives of victory and freedom that God intends for them to live as well.
Anyone who comes here is free to believe the Word we put forth for them to help them or not, but this is not a place to debate God's word because this goes against what we are trying to accomplish here. This is a place of mentorship but if you don't believe what we believe you can chew the hay and spit out the sticks (in your mind), or if you believe that all we have to offer you is sticks, then you are free to find somewhere else to seek your path to freedom from addictions.
We can only tell you how we interpret scripture ourselves in our own lives and heart by the Holy Spirit. We cannot, and do not desire to continually try to prove our points through debate. We are not asking you to believe everything we preach without checking it in the Word yourself through the studyof the Word and revelation from God. But the Bible tells us to try everything we are taught by someone who is preaching to us, that includes priests. The Bible says for us to check the Word for ourselves to see if what we are being taught is true, but that does not mean that we go around correcting everyone we disagree with docternally.
You don't have to agree with us, but you should check the Bible to see if what we are saying to help you is true before you throw it out in your own mind.
Setfree
|
|
|
Post by beloved on Aug 26, 2006 13:51:05 GMT -5
I will reply to all those verses later. I already have been researching, studying and making notes on those verses that you quoted gardener, but I will explain them later because it will take a lot of time and I don't time right now.
God Bless, beloved
|
|
|
Post by setfree on Aug 26, 2006 19:58:18 GMT -5
I errased your last post gardener since I just posted a perfectly respectful explanation to you already of what this place is for. As I said, this is meant as a mentorship, like a study course of sorts to help others get free from sinful strongholds in their lives. If you do not "subscribe" to what we put forth here to help others do that, then that is fine. Part of this board is for support and part of it is for helping others to renew their mind to who they are so they can walk into freedom.
I left your other posts since others may be thinking the same things. My wife has already told you that she will get back with you later on those verses. You must first make sure you have a good translation of the original languages that the Bible was written in, then you must make sure you are interpreting each verse in context and interpret scripture with scripture to rightly divide the Word of truth.
You could take several verses in the Bible that seem to say one thing but if you take them in that way, they clearly contradict many other scriptures. That is what is going on with the verses you are quoting. Beloved will explain later.
I can appreciate and respect that you have your own opinions but arguing over study devotions is not going to help anyone else that comes here. We are trying to help others through God's Word in the same way that God's Word helped us.
When my wife and I started these study devotions, we weren't sure whether to leave them open for others to respond to or not because of this. We want others to be able to participate in this part of the board as well by posting by topic what has also helped them in these areas but we didn't want debates and strife. That is why my wife changed the description of these threads to say that this isn't a place for debate but it is okay to reply or add to the points already made in our devotions.
I guess you can say this board is kind of like a book on how to quit ___________ and then remain free, but it also has a place to talk if you need support. Do you get what I mean now?
Its not a power thing, its a purpose thing. I hope you can respect that.
Setfree
|
|
|
Post by beloved on Aug 26, 2006 22:13:14 GMT -5
Ephesians 5:22-24 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the Saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.
Submitting yourselves to one another out of reverence for Christ (Eph. 5:21) represents a horizontal interaction that takes place between believers. It is difficult to comprehend and live out. Why? Because I believe "submission" is often misunderstood and misapplied. First of all submitting is not a command. Submission is passive in nature and results only within the context of being continually filled (saturated) with the Holy Spirit (Eph. 5:18). Second, submission is mutual and applicable to all believers in Christ (Eph. 5:21). This means that submission applies to both husbands and wives equally (Eph. 5:22). Third, submission is not something you do but is something you receive. It is not an action to be attained but an attitude of the heart to be maintained.
The Greek word, hupotasso, is often translated as "submitting to" or "being subject" in Ephesians 5:22. However this Greek word has more than one use and a range of meaning that is quite different from what people today generally think. "Hupotasso" actually has two uses: military and non-military. The military has a connotation of being "subject to" or "to obey" as if you are under someone’s command. Most people would probably think of this meaning. However the non-military use means "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden" (Thayers Greek Lexicon #5293). In ancient papyri the word hupotasso commonly meant to "support," "append," or "uphold."
The phrase: Wives, to you own husband, as to the Lord (Eph. 5:22) expands this relationship of mutual support to include the marriage relationship. Unfortunately bible translators elect to present verse 22 as a new sentence with an added verbal command such as: Wives, be subject (NRSV, NASB, REB); submit (NIV, NKJV); submit yourselves (DNT, KJV, ISV); yeild (NCV); will submit (NLT); must submit (TLB) to your own husbands, as to theLord. This is regrettable because there is no verb in the Greek text. No command is given that wives are to submit to their husbands. Only a few translations use italics or brackets as a way to indicate that the words be subject etc. are not found in the Greek manuscripts. In addition, verse 22 is not even a separate sentence. It is a phrase, a continuation of verse 21, that must be understood in light of the context of verses 18-23 which is really one long sentence in the Greek.
One cannot deduct from this one verse that God’s plan for women was to include blind obedience to her husband any more than one could say that men should always obey their wives because God told Abraham one time to do as Sarah had said (Genesis 21:12). I do not believe this verse negates a woman’s personal accountability to God, or can be taken to supplant the references to wifely “submission” with the word “obedience.”
In Matthew 23:8-12, we are told,
But do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. And do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is Christ. But the greatest among you shall be your servant. And whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted.
In Hosea 2:16, God is speaking of the kind of relationship He longs to have with the children of Israel,
“And it will come about in that day,” declares the Lord, “That you will call Me Ishi (my husband) and will no longer call Me Baali (my master).”
We can see from this Scripture that the husband/wife relationship is not to be that of a master and his subordinate, but one of mutual intimacy and love.
Genesis 21: 12 is an example of when the teachings of Jesus and the overall biblical principles take precedence over what one might misconstrue one single verse to say.
By now you are, no doubt, asking the question, “But isn’t the husband the head of the wife?” Keep reading.
The answer to that question hinges on the translation of the Greek word kephale translated “head” in Ephesians 5:23 and 1 Corinthians 11:3, and whether it means “authority over” or “source of life.” This whole passage is not talking about “authority” but “source of life.” Colossians 2:18, 19 tells us to
Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the head from whom the entire body being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments grow with a growth which is from God.
Ephesians 1:20-23 speaking of Jesus, tells us that God
. . . seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age, but also in the one to come. And He put all things in subjection under His feet, and gave Him as head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fulness of Him who fills all in all.
But the Church is not there under His feet in this Headship of government, but, rather, is at His side. As Ephesians 2:6 says we are “seated with Him in the heavenly places, in Christ Jesus.” Further more, in Revelation 3:21, Jesus didn’t say, “This is My throne; keep away.” He said, “He who overcomes, I will grant to him to sit down with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.”
All through these passages, Jesus is using the head/body metaphor and is speaking of the “head” as that which gives life to the body. None of these passages refer to Christ’s government. They represent Him as the supporter, nourisher, and builder of the body, not Her ruler. It is in this same way that man is the “head” of the wife.
Recent scholarship has increasingly concluded, after continued study of ancient biblical, secular, and medical writings, that kephale means “source of life” rather than “authority over.”
There are about 180 times in the Old Testament when the Hebrew word ro’sh clearly did mean “ruler,” “commander,” or “leader,” but the Septuagint translators rarely used kephale in translating these portions. They used other Greek words that more accurately defined “chief” when meaning a person of authority.
Kephale would have been the natural word to use in all the 180 instances if the word had been commonly understood to mean “leader or chief.” Its rare usage indicates that translators knew that kephale did not carry this meaning.
Colossians 2:19 points to Christ as the source of life. Ephesians 4:15, 16 emphasize the unity of head and body and present Christ as the nourisher and source of growth.
Just as Christ personally brings His Church to perfection (Ephesians 4:11-13) by means of the five-fold ministry (apostle, prophet, evangelist, pastor, teacher) “for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ,” so the husband’s desire should be to build up his wife until she becomes all God intended her to be. The Greek word that clearly means authority is exousia, not kephale. Christ’s authority over the Church and over the world is established in other passages of Scripture which use this Greek word exousia. Some examples are:
“But in order that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins” – then He said to the paralytic, “Rise, take up your bed, and go home” (Matthew 9:6).
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth “ (Matthew 28:18).
For just as the Father has life in Himself, even so He gave to the Son also to have life in Himself; and He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because He is the Son of Man (John 5:26, 27).
In all three of these passages, the Greek word used is exousia, a word that does carry a clear meaning of authority.
Philippians 2:3-8 admonishes,
Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bondservant, and being made in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.
The New Dictionary of Christian Ethics and Pastoral Theology defines marriage as a co-partnership of equality where "neither may lord it over the other." This represents an egalitarian view of marriage. Egalitarian marriages are described as mutual partnerships without forced roles, and characterized by a high degree of intimacy. In contrast, a traditional hierarchical view of marriage has distinct roles with the husband on top in authority over the wife.
Equality is good for a marriage. It's good for both husbands and wives. If the wife goes from a patriarchal marriage to an egalitarian one, she'll be much happier, much less likely to look for a way out. And in the long run, the husbands are happier too.
Dr. David H. Olson, Professor Emeritus, Family Social Science, University of Minnesota, compiled a national survey based on 21,501 married couples using a comprehensive marital assessment tool called ENRICH. This national survey, published in the year 2000, represents one of the largest and most comprehensive analyses of martial strengths and stumbling blocks. Couples were asked to complete 30 background questions and 165 specific questions that focused on 20 significant marital issues. This survey identified the top ten strengths of happy marriages and the top ten stumbling blocks for married couples. This data is summarized in the attached Appendix. Using these top ten strengths, it is possible to discriminate between happy and unhappy marriages with 93% accuracy.
A significant discovery was made in relation to marital satisfaction and role relationships. It discovered that (81%) of equalitarian (egalitarian) couples were happily married, while (82%) of couples where both spouses perceived their relationship as traditional (hierarchical) were mainly unhappy.
This means that only 18% of traditional marriages were reported as happy. In relation to intimacy 98% of happy couples feel very close to each other, while only 27% of unhappy couples felt the same. The inability to share leadership equally (couple inflexibility) was the top stumbling block to a happy marriage.
Wives or husbands are not commanded to submit, be ruled or dominated by their spouses. Both are meant to cooperate and support one another in the spirit of love and unity. Marriages based on egalitarian concepts of equality, shared power and leadership are happiest of all marriages. The research independently affirms these marriages and supports the egalitarian view of Scripture.
Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
After the Fall, Chrysostom said of her future: "thy turning shall be to thy husband" (Gen. 3.16). Notice that Chrysostom did not translate this Greek phrase as your desire will be for your husband, as most modern Bibles do. The emphasis and significance of turning means that "Eve is turning away from God to her husband, and, as a consequence of that deflection, Adam will rule over her." Chrysostom clearly states that the subordination of women occurred as a result of the Fall. However, this condition no longer exists for it was lifted as a result of the atoning work of Jesus Christ who has redeemed us from the curse of the Law (Gal 3:13). Scripture tells us that both husband and wife have "exousiazo," meaning "authority" over each other. In fact, the only place Scripture uses the common Greek word meaning authority "exousia" in relation to a husband and wife is found in 1 Corinthians 7:4. This deals with the couple's sexual responsibility to each other.
Furthermore, one could argue that the wife is the real "master" of the home since she is to "oikodespotein." Wives are the ones who are to actively "manage their homes" or "the household" (1 Timothy 5:14 ISV, NCV, NIV, NKJV, NRSV). She is to "rule the house" (AVS, DBY). The Greek verb "oikodespoteo" is one of the strongest terms used to express exercising authority in relation to the home. It literally means "to be master (or head) of the house; to rule a household, manage family affairs" (Thayers Greek Lexicon #3616-17). The noun oikodespotes is variously translated either as "master", "owner," "head of the house," or "head of the household" (Matt. 21:33, 24:43; Luke 12:39, 13:25, 14:21). Thus Scripture is really affirming that wives "rule" the home. They are the house-despots!
Christians should remember that the real spiritual "head" of the home is Jesus Christ alone, in whom all authority rests (Matt. 28:18). The point is that marriage was never meant to be a struggle over power or who is "in charge." Rather, the male and female are meant to exist in a covenant commitment in which the "two become one" through mutual love and support (hupotasso). Developing healthy relationships is dependent on having a proper attitude and respect for members of the opposite sex.
Besides all of the above I just wanted to add that this sexual discrimination in the church leaves women hurt, frustrated and even angry with God as shown in a quote from the book "A Woman's Place" by Bernadine Tillman
Anything that is of God's will, will cause us to run to Him and not from Him. There have been many women who have run from God because of these teachings and many more who refuse to come to God because of this.
Anything that brings bondage, fear and pain or insecurity to our lives is not from God. Gods love and acceptance and approval of women is not second class and he does not see us as such. We are also the, "apple of His eye".
Also, anything that is sin produces harm, destruction and death. Living in marriages where equality reigns produces life while living in marriage where one dominates the other ends often in divorce because it kills the spirit of the one being dominated.
****************************************************************************
I Corinthians 14:34-35 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
This verse is actually not what Paul said to the church at Corinth. This in the original letter was written by Paul as a quote of what the leadership of the Corinthian church wrote to Paul. Paul quoted their letter here in I. Cor. 14: 34- 35 and then responded in verse 36, "What! came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?"
So, you can see that Paul was appauled at such a notion and disagreed with the Corinthian leaders in his response in verse 36. Conveniently, translators left out the fact that verses 34 and 35 were a quote in the original letter of Paul written to the Corinthian church.
Also, if you check the reference margin in your Bible of verses 34- 35 you will find that there is no reference to the old testement where this "law" of women not speaking, or being obedient to their husbands is found, because there are no such law in the Old Testement. And whatever Paul said in his letters were never new commandments. There are no new commandments in the New Testement. All commandments of law were given in the O.T. So anything that Paul said should not go against the laws in the old testement or they are being mistranslated and/or misunderstood. And if it seems to be a new commandment not covered in the old, then again it is being mistranslated and/or misunderstood because there are no new laws in the new testement.
*************************************************************************
Corinthians 11:6-7 If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. 7A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man.
I have to question if these verses were originally pinned by Paul or if they as well were quotes because Paul seems to conradict what is said in these verses later.
Regardless, Paul is speaking of the literal, physical head of a man and a woman. In some local congregations of Jews, the priests were required to have a head covering. The Woman's Bible suggests that on Jewish traditions the priests were required to have a head covering. Those traditions are recorded in Exodus 28:4, 37-38; 29:6,9; 39:28,31; and Leviticus 8:9. Kluane Spake writes in You are Acceptable to Me that Jewish men, not Jewish women, covered their heads to worship with a garment called a "tallith." Some men wore a tallith all the time. In contemporary culture, orthodox Jewish males wear head shawls during prayer. Greek and Roman males also usually prayed with covered heads except before the Father of the gods and before a deity known as "Glory." Thus, head coverings are common to the culture of the geographical area, Christian and Gentile. Spake also asserts that Jewish women wore their hair bound up in public because unbound hair was almost considered as nudity, or immorality. In the Greek Christian church, men who covered their heads with a tallith would be indicating that Christ was not as divine as a Greek god. He would "dishonor his own head" or his source, Christ, by praying to God with his head covered. Thus, we can plainly see that covered heads in worship meant different things to different groups.
Now, in reference to our scripture, while women did not use a tallith, Jewish and Gentile women did veil themselves. Some Rabbis demanded a man divorce his wife if she was seen in public unveiled. In some pagan ceremonies women would discard their veils as a sign of freedom from their oftentimes oppressive husbands.
Verse six, then should be examined. Here, we must understand that if a woman's head was shaved, it was a mark of disgrace. The shaving of a woman's head was used as punishment and reprisal. Therefore, if a woman had a shaven head, Paul suggests she cover it. Furthermore, women who did not wear veils and who had bald heads or short hair could be mistaken for prostitutes or entertainers. The Hetariai wore their hair shorter than the men. As a final blow to the value of women, the Greeks held that woman was created from a substance inferior to that of man. The philosophers held that woman could never be equal with man in moral or spiritual qualities and was, therefore, unworthy to be his true companion. Thus, as you can surmise, it is necessary that there be an understanding of the customs, values, and culture of the times in order to fully understand Paul. Without such study, it is easily plausible to misappropriate the truth.
In verse 7, Paul is saying to the men that since you are in the image of God, you should not have your head veiled. Woman is in the image of man (when God formed woman, she was taken out of man) - she reflects both God and man. In the beginning when God crated man and woman they both were in His image and likeness. When God formed man from the ground, he reflected God. When God took woman out of man, she reflects man. ("She is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh. She shall be called woman because she was taken out of man.") Verse 8 reaffirms that woman was created for man because we know from Genesis 2: God had judged that man needed help to carry out God's commands to tend the garden and to keep or protect it. Woman was made for man as an equal partner to accomplish the purpose of God. Man alone (in his separation) could not comply with God's command. Verse 10 finishes by saying woman "should have a symbol of authority on "her head" because of the angels. The Greek New Testament reads, "A woman should have power over here head (physical head) because of the angels." The word "power" is exousia, which means a freedom of choice. Therefore, the verse says that a woman should have the freedom of choice to cover or uncover her head, and she should not be judged or categorized because of her choice. Additional scriptures using the same language, "power over," include: Luke 9:1 "Power and authority over demons"; Luke 10: 19 "Authority over all the power of the enemy"; Revelation 2:26 "Power over the nations"; Revelation 6:8 "Power over the fourth part of the earth?"; Revelation 14:18 "Power over fire"; and Revelation 16:9 "Power over these plagues."
If we were writing an epistle today to show the difference between proper Christian deportment and culture, those who would read our work void of understanding the times in which we live might also make laws that would not reflect the true meaning of what we were addressing.
|
|