Can We Obey God and also Vote for a Woman?

[OzSpen]

Your reference of 1 Cor 11:5 is not speaking about in the church. The discussion of church comes later in the chapter:

"Now in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. For, to begin with, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you; and to some extent I believe it." (1Cor 11:17-18, NRSV)

Eddie,

Where does the husband and wife prophesying take place? In the church! Your argument falls flat. First Cor 14:4 (NIV) states: "Anyone who speaks in a tongue edifies themselves, but the one who prophesies edifies the church." The gift of prophecy takes place in the church and that is done by both men and women.

First Cor 11:4-5 states: "4 Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5 But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved." The gift of prophesy - a vocal gift - is demonstrated by BOTH men and women. That's Bible!

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

I am very surprised that no one has stopped in this thread to consider this passage, which is considered the pinnacle of biblical womanhood:

Proverbs 31:10
An excellent wife, who can find? For her worth is far above jewels.
11 The heart of her husband trusts in her, And he will have no lack of gain.
12 She does him good and not evil All the days of her life.
13 She looks for wool and flax And works with her hands in delight.
14 She is like merchant ships; She brings her food from afar.
15 She rises also while it is still night And gives food to her household And portions to her maidens.
16 She considers a field and buys it; From her earnings she plants a vineyard.
17 She girds herself with strength And makes her arms strong.
18 She senses that her gain is good; Her lamp does not go out at night.
19 She stretches out her hands to the distaff, And her hands grasp the spindle.
20 She extends her hand to the poor, And she stretches out her hands to the needy.
21 She is not afraid of the snow for her household, For all her household are clothed with scarlet.
22 She makes coverings for herself; Her clothing is fine linen and purple.
23 Her husband is known in the gates, When he sits among the elders of the land.
24 She makes linen garments and sells them, And supplies belts to the tradesmen.
25 Strength and dignity are her clothing, And she smiles at the future.
26 She opens her mouth in wisdom, And the teaching of kindness is on her tongue.
27 She looks well to the ways of her household, And does not eat the bread of idleness.
28 Her children rise up and bless her; Her husband also, and he praises her, saying:
29 “Many daughters have done nobly, But you excel them all.”
30 Charm is deceitful and beauty is vain, But a woman who fears the Lord, she shall be praised.
31 Give her the product of her hands, And let her works praise her in the gates.

D,

Were those instructions for Israelite women or are they for Christian women as well?

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Your reference of 1 Cor 11:5 is not speaking about in the church. The discussion of church comes later in the chapter:

Eddie,

That is not true. The whole of 1 Cor was written to a Christian church and was meant for correction.

Oz

 

[D-D-W]

Were those instructions for Israelite women or are they for Christian women as well?

Since Gentile Christians are "grafted in" per Romans 11, it applies to the church as well.

 

[eddif]

Since Gentile Christians are "grafted in" per Romans 11, it applies to the church as well.

Defining the one new man we become is of great interest to me / us / (everyone?).

IMHO the grafting really could take a book to describe. Plant grafting may help in one chapter. The grafted branch lives from what it is grafted onto, but keeps its genetic identity. The nutrients supplied are different.

Jesus as the bridegroom is probably the highest order of understanding. Each of us has a relationship with Jesus (Jew and Gentile)
alike.
The Jew loses his dependence on the law for righteousness ( which I do not accuse all modern Jewish parties of). The side notes of Jew and Gentile alike (in many cases) have to be deleted / lowered.

A man and woman have a child that has the traits of both. Grafting is a little different. Can I define everything about it? No. Mississippi rednecks are not very smart.

Over time a thread to discuss all this might prove to be of worth.

eddif

 

[eddif]

A Jewish proselyte may not be the same as the one new man derived from Jew and Gentile.

This whole subject has several NT passages that may help. This thread probably needs some understanding.


eddif

 

[Delete_me]

It's possible that, given God's biblical design, that the best man for the job would be more fitting than the best woman for the job.

Even if that were true, though--and that is by no means a given--that is not the reality of democratic races. A small set of choices are set before you to vote for: some men, some women. Phoebe will make a better president than King Herod. Lydia makes a better president than Simon Magus. Elijah would make a better president than Jezebel.

 

[OzSpen]

Since Gentile Christians are "grafted in" per Romans 11, it applies to the church as well.

So does capital punishment apply for Gentile Christian women caught in adultery as per Lev 20:10 (NIV)?

 

[jaybo]

So does capital punishment apply for Gentile Christian women caught in adultery as per Lev 20:10 (NIV)?

I'm not sure where this is coming from but people, including Gentile Christian women, are governed by the laws of the society they live in. Only Orthodox Jews are ruled by OT law.

As far as I know that is the case in most of Christendom. Are adulterous women killed in Australia?

 

[OzSpen]

I'm not sure where this is coming from but people, including Gentile Christian women, are governed by the laws of the society they live in. Only Orthodox Jews are ruled by OT law.

As far as I know that is the case in most of Christendom. Are adulterous women killed in Australia?

jaybo,

Of course adulterous women are NOT killed in Australia as Christians live under the New Covenant and the government of Australia.

Oz

 

[eddif]

We are getting very close to discussing Thr One New Man.

A Human Betrothed to Jesus.

The Jew gives up on the literal physical and looks at the Metaphysicsl reality. The Jew still sees the Law, but only as a guide directing them to Jesus. The Holy Spirit directs their life.



The Gentile throws away their ( I’ll do whatever I want and make up the rules as I go along). The direction of a Gentile turns toward God, but the Gentiles realize the Law can be used lawfully, but not literally. The Holy Spirit directs their life.

One new man. Admits the Law can be used lawfully. Knows all have sinned and falls short of the glory of God. Stops seeing himself as master, but receives the quickening spirit of the second Adam as director of their life.

So help me see the errors I may have made.

Mississippi redeem always in search of transformation himself.
eddif

 

[D-D-W]

I'm not sure where this is coming from

I have a fairly good idea where it is coming from.

So does capital punishment apply for Gentile Christian women caught in adultery as per Lev 20:10 (NIV)?

The verse you quote requires the man to be killed as well. We are instructed in both Romans and 1 Peter to follow the laws of the land where we live. The laws of most western democratic nations do not allow for such killings. Even Rome did not always allow for it, as we see in the Gospels.

 

[OzSpen]

I have a fairly good idea where it is coming from.

The verse you quote requires the man to be killed as well. We are instructed in both Romans and 1 Peter to follow the laws of the land where we live. The laws of most western democratic nations do not allow for such killings. Even Rome did not always allow for it, as we see in the Gospels.

D,

Acts 5:29 (NIV) gives the biblical mandate: 'Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than human beings!"'

When the New Covenant laws clash with government laws, that's when we are to obey God rather than human-made laws.

Oz

 

[D-D-W]

Acts 5:29 (NIV) gives the biblical mandate: 'Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than human beings!"'
When the New Covenant laws clash with government laws, that's when we are to obey God rather than human-made laws.

Absolutely. But you should realize that the men Peter et al were speaking to were the High Priest and his Sadducean cohorts, NOT the Roman secular government.

How did our Lord legally ** let the woman in John 8 go who was caught in adultery?

** according to the Law of Moses

 

[eddif]

Absolutely. But you should realize that the men Peter et al were speaking to were the High Priest and his Sadducean cohorts, NOT the Roman secular government.

How did our Lord legally ** let the woman in John 8 go who was caught in adultery?

** according to the Law of Moses

If it was rape and she had cried out she would have been guiltless?

Matthew 23:23 kjv
23. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Gentiles have a tough time seeing the Law, but some Jews have a tough time understanding when the law is read too.

2 Corinthians 3:15 kjv
15. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.

If the middle wall separating Jew and Gentile is torn down (and it is in Christ Jesus), we should be able to get through this.

There are two covenants.

2 Corinthians 13:1
1. This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

Jesus dismissed the woman by lack of witnesses.

Mississippi redneck
eddif

 

[D-D-W]

If it was rape and she had cried out she would have been guiltless?

It was not rape and that did not answer the question until you got to your last sentence.

It was the custom of the day (that we lose in our being removed by 2 millennia) that no one could be a witness if they had a part in what happened. By bringing her to our Lord to trap Him, they made themselves part of the conspiracy.

"Let he who is without sin (referring to this specific matter) cast the first stone."

And why did our Lord take that route? There was a rabbinic principle that He used on several occasions (thus validating it) that if 2 commands of the Law are in conflict, the positive command (thou shalt) trumps the negative. (thou shalt not) He used the command to preserve and save life.

 

[eddif]

It was not rape and that did not answer the question until you got to your last sentence.

Thus the question mark. For Jesus could have known her condition by a word of knowledge.

Deuteronomy 22:23 kjv
23: If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
24. Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.
25. But if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her, and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die:
26. But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death: for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter:

The Law can get complicated.

eddif

 

[eddif]

There was a rabbinic principle that He used on several occasions (thus validating it) that if 2 commands of the Law are in conflict, the positive command (thou shalt) trumps the negative. (thou shalt not) He used the command to preserve and save life.

And when a Gentile quotes his traditional side note out of his favorite commentary (undoing the word of God), Jew and Gentile alike should not listen. A modern parallel may be accepted (if it fits exactly), but at times comments are just wrong.

IMHO sometimes the negative response might be the correct response. We do not know what Jesus wrote on the ground. The Gentiles offer all sorts of answers.

This is all hard to do.

eddif

 

[smaller]

Satan in almost predictable fashions i.e. in the flesh world, always has a phony standard being raised, and that has never been more obvious than the gender neutral, no borders postures being put out by some worldly governments today, particularly here in the U.S.

But you see, God's Word was on to this in the Spiritual Senses, NOT in the fleshly senses, long long ago:

Galatians 3:28

There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

No nations, no sexes, one in Christ

It is however different than what the world proposes. They would have us believe it is a fleshly matter, when it's not

As to voting/participating in the flesh world, entirely optional because that world is technically controlled by God Himself, and it is HIS WRATH and JUDGMENT that applies on the wicked world, and it's not a pretty picture, is it?

1 Cor. 5:
12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?
13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

Eph. 2:
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

Can you vote for a woman? Really?

Maybe ask yourself, "Can I vote for a child of WRATH?" That's WHO you are voting for, every.single.time.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

It was not rape and that did not answer the question until you got to your last sentence.

It was the custom of the day (that we lose in our being removed by 2 millennia) that no one could be a witness if they had a part in what happened. By bringing her to our Lord to trap Him, they made themselves part of the conspiracy.

"Let he who is without sin (referring to this specific matter) cast the first stone."

And why did our Lord take that route? There was a rabbinic principle that He used on several occasions (thus validating it) that if 2 commands of the Law are in conflict, the positive command (thou shalt) trumps the negative. (thou shalt not) He used the command to preserve and save life.

This is a terrific teaching.
Thank you.