The role of women in the church

[Orthodox Christian]

Saint Fotini, otherwise known as the Samaritan woman, was one of the first and most powerful evangelists, starting her ministry even before the crucifixion. Prisca and Aquilla were a husband and wife team of apostolic teachers, and she was the more prominent of the two. There were deifintely women diaconates in the early Church. These women were over 60.

There are two reaons why the qualification Paul sets forth for such widows was over 60:
1. Cultural- women were generally unable to self-support, so they were to either marry, or the Church would have to support them. Those over 60 were not going to get drafted in the marriage bowl...so the Church enlisted them.(diaconess).
2. Women under 60 would be still menopausal, and no women of menstrual age were allowed near the altar. This is because the Christian altar is bloodless, only the blood of the Lamb is allowed to be there.

The early Church struggled with how to deal with the social changes the gospel brought. Slaves were no longer slaves in Christ- yet Paul told them to live as slaves anyway. The greater issue was not social revolution, but righteousness. Same goes for the behavior of women.

Twenty centuries have passed, and we have now completely forbid slavery. The gospel has brought about social change. Women are no longer seen as property, but are able to vote, inherit property, earn a living, and so forth.

Women should be allowed to serve and assist in the Church, even to the capacity of preaching and serving at the altar (under the biblical stipulation of over 60). Beyond that, any man that is threatened by his wife being a lioness for God should think about becoming a man, as opposed to a child.

As for the examples of women who teach, such as Joyce Meyers- and the related criticism of their doctrines:
Did any of you boys have mothers that taught you the scriptures? Women Sunday School teachers?
Get over yourselves already.

I'll see your Joyce Meyers and raise you a Jim Jones. False teachers? It takes more than someone teaching something you disagree with to qualify them as false teachers.

 

[joyinhim]

AV bunyan,

Now, you have been answering to every one's confrontation, would you answer mine also which you avoided in my thread? thank you.

 

[NRoof]

BJGrolle,
I was going to respond as I said I would but with the further information presented by you it is clear you situation is different than any I have personally encountered.

I wish I had an answer for you but bottom line is I don't. The information I provided is what little study I had done on the subject for another reason and while I still believe what I said I have no clue about what God has for you.

My only recommendation is to really pray about it. Pray that God will open the doors he wants you to go through and close the ones he doesn't. Bottom line make sure it is his will and not yours that are being followed in which ever path you follow. I say this from experience as I have done what I thought was Gods will only to have him shut that door on me. After a period of self-pity I learned that it was my will and not Gods that I had been following. It is really easy to deceive ourselves into believing we are doing Gods will even though we aren't. I'm not saying this is what you are doing but bring it up only as a caution.

In any event I wish you well and you will be in my prayers.

 

[BJGrolle]

I just read your testimony, BJGrolle. I am sorry you had to go through that. You didn't deserve it. {{{Hug}}}

As you may or or may not have noticed, I am an atheist, so I tend to have a different perspective than many on this board. So I don't believe you heard God, but I also do not think you are crazy. What I think on this is probably better expressed as an PM.

But I am curious about something. Why do you think God let you get abused? After all, God send angels to helo Lot live. He sent plagues to people that questioned Moses. He struck people down with fire that approached His ark wrong. So why do you think He chose to just talk to you instead of actually help you out? If you loved someone, would you watch them get abused and not stop it if you could? Do you think that God loves you? I am not trying to disprove God, I am just curious as to how you reconcile this.

The Adam and Eve story makes little sense to me. The only way it makes sense is if God just wanted an excuse to punish people. After all, God could have made the tree inaccessible or made Adam and Eve have some kind of fruit-phobia. Or God could have kept the snake from corrupting innocents. So it seems like a set up.

But it also seems to contradict the Bible where it says that the sons shall not bear the punishments from the sins of the fathers. If that were true, than Cain and Able (and all children) should have access to Eden and should not have been barred from it. I have heard people try to reconcile this, but I find the explanations poor. The children are cused by God for a sin they did not commit.

You sound like a strong and smart woman, so I am glad you are not falling into submission. I hope it all goes well for you.

Quath

Thanks Quath.

No, I hadn't noticed, but that's OK. As you know, Christians often have trouble interpreting the Bible. You're seeing firsthand how differences in interpretations can affect how people choose to carry out those understandings in their daily lives.

Why did God let me get abused? I'll give it my best shot, whether it seems to make sense or not.

It's my belief that God lets adversity into our lives to help us grow, to season us if you will, so that we are better prepared to live with him in eternity. That's just a general way of putting it.

Why couldn't I have been born into a loving family as my husband was? After all, God has the same goals for him, for all of us. Being born into an abusive family seems to be counterproductive.

On one hand, God is all-knowing, all-seeing. He knew long before I was born what kind of family He was putting me into. That sounds cruel, doesn't it? No, I'd never wish that on my own kids.

But God doesn't think as we do - you've probably heard that before. He thinks in terms of what's best for us to shape our characters in preparation for an eternal life with Him. To me, those years I spent in fear, hurt, anger, were a big, big part of my life. But considering that I hope to live forever, that part of my life is very insignificant. I can look back on those years and say that now, but when I was in the thick of it, no way. It was, why me?

I am quick to recognize evil and depravity in others now. This protects me to a certain extent. It might serve to help me protect my kids, who knows? They will certainly never have contact with my father again. If not for knowing that the depravity went back to at least 2 generations in my mother's family, then I might be easily fooled into hoping that there was a possibility for redemption in my father. I might have been tempted to still let him into our lives and be ignorantly putting my children at risk.

Only God knows His intentions and the exact reason. I can only be certain that there was a reason for it, and it wasn't a frivolous one.

Yes, I do love God. He brought me and my husband together. He gave me my 2 kids. This is a story for another topic someday, but He saved my son when he was very ill last year and I learned some lessons in that you would not believe!

Adam and Eve. I'm going to tell you the only thing I know, that you've probably heard before. God didn't create us to be a bunch of robots. He wants us to obey Him of our own free will, not because He said so.

Think of it this way. I want my kids to obey me. Do I want them to do this because I am their mother and "because I said so"? Or do I want them to obey me because it's the right and respectful thing to do?

On the surface, it would seem like I'd get the same results either way. But having them obey me out of a robotic impulse would not forge any emotional bond between us. I might as well have bought a couple of robots instead of having kids - and I wouldn't have to bother feeding them!

But God created us to obey Him or disobey Him of our own free will. So, my kids are going to obey me and disobey me of their own free will also. It feels real good when they obey, and it hurts emotionally when they disobey.

None of us want that hurt, but without the hurt, we never experience the joy. We would be emotionless, like the Vulcans on Star Trek. Who wants to be like that?

What happens to a kid who disobeys without being punished? They turn out to be spoiled brats who go on to do worse and worse things in life, continually hurting others, bringing shame to their parents.

God doesn't want us to be spoiled brats either. So he had to punish mankind for the original sin. He gave us an out of sorts in Jesus - that's way oversimplifying it because a lot of other things come into play with that event.

(It's complicated, because being an unbeliever doesn't make a person a spoiled brat anymore than being a Christian means a person isn't a spoiled brat.)

The sins of the fathers and the sons. I haven't thought too much about that one. I'll try to dig up some hard data on that, but I can tell you what I heard a Lutheran pastor preach on that subject:

He said that we are all born with inherited sin from the Fall. Sin is inherent in us - we can't get away from it. He used children as a specific example. When a very young child first says the word "No." to their parents, who taught them that? No one. A child of 2 with the most loving parents can easily break the Commandment of honoring thy mother and father, with that simple word. Who teaches teenagers to talk back to their parents and rebel against their authority? No one. It is an inherent part of our human nature to sin. It didn't need to be taught to us.

Adam and Eve disobeyed and rebelled against God. We've never stopped doing it ever since. That is why the punishment continues. Human nature will not change on this earth.

Christianity must seem very strange to unbelievers. Keep in mind, I've always been a believer, even before I had a Bible I could read. No human taught me that God exists. He did. I felt, I heard, I saw, well before I read any of God's Word. My faith is strong because of that.

In "normal" families, mine now included, kids are dragged off to Sunday School, given Bibles at a certain age, they color pictures of Jesus, etc. People get their weekly dose of the religion hour and never give Him much thought beyond that. For that, the institution of organized religion is at fault.

Coming to this forum to discuss Christianity, discussing God in the home, thinking of Him while gardening, even getting mad at Him when things don't seem to be going so well - these are what putting God into your daily life means.

Belief and faith have to come first. I know, how can you talk to someone who you can't see, who you've never met? Well, just don't do it aloud in front of others and you won't be embarrassed. : (Just say, "God, are you there?")

Do you remember I mentioned a personal relationship with God? That's what it is! We're all a big extended family in His eyes. We each have our own personalities and quirks and He has a different plan for each of us. He's given us the skills that will carry us along on the path to Him. Your path is not my path, and vice versa.

I don't believe in coincidence. God is often in the little things. He doesn't speak out of burning bushes anymore. But He still speaks. It's up to us to listen.

(Climbing down out of the pulpit now.) :smt023

 

[BJGrolle]

BJGrolle,

I am not as confused now as I first was when you posted this thread. You indicated at first that you were a hard-headed woman that didn't understand. I must retract that first impression and agree that within you is MUCH understanding.

Don't know what else to offer but this: Isn't it amazing when you first begin to realize that those members that you so wanted to emulate in the beginning are so lacking in anything other than attendance? And please understand that this is NOT entirely their fault. Yes, they have been lazy, but they have also been encouraged to be so by the organization that they have entrusted their Salvation to. Scary isn't it?

I don't know this for a fact but, I have been told by MANY members of the Catholic faith, that their churches DON'T even encourage their members to read the Bible and most don't even carry one to services. It must be really easy to teach whatever you wish to a group that is so trusting with the liberty they have offered.

I too have played the church game for my wires sake. Fortunately for me she has finally began to understand how deceptively dangerous they are. One easily sets into the routine and stops growing in their walk. I believe that most never even develope the understanding of God as you have learned, they just keep going back in hopes of finding something that they are missing.

What the church rarely teaches is that Salvation is a personal issue and the kingdom of God does not dwell with the walls of a temple or buildings built by men. They often refer to themselves as 'the house of God' but this is not true either as I hope you well know. The temple of God is within the individual not without. And since the crucifiction and death of Christ, God no longer dwells within a structure made by the hands of men but within the men themselves through the Spirit of Jesus Christ. Thank you Jesus.

We have been freed from the law that bound us to earthly men of the past and there is a new covenant now that allows us each the communion with God through Christ. There are those that can lead us closer now than ever before, but we are no longer bound to them as in the past.

I offer this as encouragement, NOT to cause dissention. I see that you have begun to learn this and only hope that this seed that God has planted within you will be nourished and grow. YOU DON'T NEED ANYONE to develope a 'true' relationship with the Father through Christ and anyone that tells you otherwise is doing so our of their will and not the Fathers.

You are certainly on the right track. And yes, BJGrolle, you are doing the right thing by following your husband. He will find it difficult to accept any thing other than that which he has already learned. The dangerous part of believing in a church instead of God. But let your relationship flourish and grow and be an example to him and this alone will perhaps show him the Way. Don't get your hopes up though. His relationship with God is his responsibility just as yours is yours.

Just don't get lazy and fall back on what you have been offered and let it stagnate. It's been given to you an understanding and ability to grow closer, do so with all your heart.

You don't know what it means to me to hear you say these things.

I do come across as hard-headed at first, one of my faults. Remember I said my husband had much better skills in that area. Diplomatic, I am not.

I left your post intact above, because it deserves to be read again.

I'm glad to hear you say I'm doing the right thing by following my husband. He is a very flexible man in many things and would be so even in this. But if we are to make a change someday, it must be of his desire also, not to please me.

He has the idea that losing our pastor might be the catalyst to turn our church around. He might be right, but I am not nearly so optimistic. He knows that, too. We don't keep secrets from each other.

The people in my church - I've gotten to know some of them through helping out at the rummage sales the past couple of years. They are very nice people! But you wouldn't know it when church issues get to being discussed. They are so ultra-protective of their institution. It's been their church home for decades, literally. They've put their hearts in it instead of where it really belongs, with God. But I can understand that is probably how they were brought up - it's all they know.

Where God leads me, I will follow. I've learned that life is a lot easier when I do. :

 

[Quath]

But God doesn't think as we do - you've probably heard that before. He thinks in terms of what's best for us to shape our characters in preparation for an eternal life with Him. To me, those years I spent in fear, hurt, anger, were a big, big part of my life. But considering that I hope to live forever, that part of my life is very insignificant. I can look back on those years and say that now, but when I was in the thick of it, no way. It was, why me?

This seems like a "No pain, no gain" type of philosophy. (Personally, I prefer "No pain, no pain.") How do you see other people going through such hard problems. Like there was a baby that was raped and killed. Do you think that God allowed the suffering so that baby could learn something for the afterlife?

Only God knows His intentions and the exact reason. I can only be certain that there was a reason for it, and it wasn't a frivolous one.

I guess this is essense of belief. Believing without knowing why. I I did believe in these stories, I would have to conclude that "love" does not describe what God feels for us.

Adam and Eve. I'm going to tell you the only thing I know, that you've probably heard before. God didn't create us to be a bunch of robots. He wants us to obey Him of our own free will, not because He said so.

I guess I have a better opinion of robots.

Look at it this way. God knows the future so we can not surprise Him. God also choses what is made, so everything is predetermined. So God makes the original choice. He could make Adam and Eve that would sin or He could make Bob and June that would never want to sin. So God set everything up like a giant domino board and then watched everything fall. However, each domino feels it has the free will to chose when it falls.

He said that we are all born with inherited sin from the Fall. Sin is inherent in us - we can't get away from it. He used children as a specific example. When a very young child first says the word "No." to their parents, who taught them that? No one. A child of 2 with the most loving parents can easily break the Commandment of honoring thy mother and father, with that simple word. Who teaches teenagers to talk back to their parents and rebel against their authority? No one. It is an inherent part of our human nature to sin. It didn't need to be taught to us.

This makes it sound like there is a sin gene. Was this gene introduced by God? Or in other words, God made us, therefore He designed us to sin. That seems contrary. Why would something perfect and good make something that is designed to displease you?

Belief and faith have to come first. I know, how can you talk to someone who you can't see, who you've never met? Well, just don't do it aloud in front of others and you won't be embarrassed. : (Just say, "God, are you there?")

I use to be Christian. When I asked God if Here were there, I did not get an answer.

Quath

 

[joyinhim]

Quath,

You are saying that you used to be a Christian, so you are not any more.I May I ask why you left God?

I know this is off topic question, I hope Bj won't mind. :

 

[AVBunyan]

AV bunyan,

Now, you have been answering to every one's confrontation, would you answer mine also which you avoided in my thread? thank you.

1. Which ones? There were many posts.

I don't avoid questions and most here (who have been here a while) will attest to this fact as I have been posting for almost 3 years or so. But I do choose when I decide to "chat" and due to time restraints just can't get them all.

2. Are you sure you want my answers after reading my posts?

 

[joyinhim]

AV bunyan,

Now, you have been answering to every one's confrontation, would you answer mine also which you avoided in my thread? thank you.

1. Which ones? There were many posts.

I don't avoid questions and most here (who have been here a while) will attest to this fact as I have been posting for almost 3 years or so. But I do choose when I decide to "chat" and due to time restraints just can't get them all.

2. Are you sure you want my answers after reading my posts?

My OSAS thread, thank you.

 

[BJGrolle]

How do you see other people going through such hard problems. Like there was a baby that was raped and killed. Do you think that God allowed the suffering so that baby could learn something for the afterlife?

No. Each person's situation is different. We're supposed to believe that God makes good things come out of bad. I can speak on my behalf and tell you how I believe that was done for me in my life. It's impossible for me to speak on someone else's behalf, not having walked in their shoes.

I hope you don't see that as a cop-out.

My best guess is that a baby cannot learn something for the afterlife. Was there someone else who was supposed to learn a lesson from this baby's death? The sick person who committed the crime? Someone else in the baby's family? Someone who happened to read or hear of the news account of the horrible tragedy? We could go on guessing forever and never know the answer.

The baby is with God now.

I believe that God does love us, but He has also felt many other emotions towards us, like impatience and anger.

I'm not too clear on the predetermination theory. I understand what you're saying, but I'm not sure of my thoughts on this issue.

This makes it sound like there is a sin gene. Was this gene introduced by God? Or in other words, God made us, therefore He designed us to sin. That seems contrary. Why would something perfect and good make something that is designed to displease you?

I don't know that God designed us to sin. We were made in His image, which was good, and we were supposed to stay that way. But Adam and Eve ate of the tree and then understood both good and evil. Before that, they were ignorant - they say ignorance is bliss.

My Life Application Bible says this:

God gave Adam responsibility for the garden and told him not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Rather than physically preventing him from eating, God gave Adam a choice, and thus the possibility of choosing wrongly. God still gives us choices, and we, too, often choose wrongly. These wrong choices may cause us pain, but they can help us learn and grown and make better choices in the future. Living with the consequences of our choices teaches us to think and choose more carefully.

Why would God place a tree in the garden and then forbid Adam to eat from it? God wanted Adam to obey, but God gave Adam the freedom to choose. Without choice, Adam would have been like a prisoner, and his obedience would have been hollow. The two trees provided an exercise in choice, with rewards for choosing to obey and sad consequences for choosing to disobey.

joyinhim, nope I don't mind at all. Go off topic.

 

[AVBunyan]

AV bunyan,

Now, you have been answering to every one's confrontation, would you answer mine also which you avoided in my thread? thank you.

My OSAS thread, thank you.

I'm still not sure what ones you are refrring to but at any rate I think I'll probably pass - I don't really discuss OSAS like folks think I do - I discuss justification. For if one is off on OSAS then he is off on justification.

If you think you can lose it then you most likely don't have justificaton settled and need to get justification settled and then you won't have issues with OSAS.

If you want to know what I believe or answers to your questions then search my posts on justification - there are enough of them.

God bless 8-)

 

[D46]

Does the wife's submission to the husband mean that she is less than the husband, less important, or belittled? Again, not at all. Not having a place of leadership in the church does not mean a woman is less of a person, less important to God, or inferior. All are equal before God whether it be Jew, Gentile, free, slave, male, or female. But in the church, God has set up an order the same way he set one up in the family. The chain of command is Jesus, the man, the wife, and the children.

This pretty much sums up my beliefs as well. A woman in not inferior to the man in spiritual matters from all indications I've seen throughout my life and, in actuality, many are greater prayer warriors than a lot of men I've seen. Many I've known have a great understand of the Scriptures and in many cases are "in tune", so to speak, with God moreso than a lot of men, as far too many women will attest of their husbands who should be the spiritual leader. I see nothing wrong with a sister teaching Sunday school lessons to those that are not adults yet (under 18) as this has been going on as far back as I can remember.They are still on milk and cannot as yet, digest the "meat" taught in the congregation if for no other reason, just due to their youth. The adults sit in the congregation and the children attend Sunday school class. The little ones (babies) usuall go to the nursery unless the parents want to try to keep them pacified during the service. This is the way it was and still is in most Protestant churches.

In short, just because a man is a male doesn't automatically give him the knowledge to know all things spiritually or that he even knows how to lead and guide his family in such matters. Many women are far better equiped to do so and are closer to the Lord than their husbands and read and study the bible while he may be on the computer checking out the porno sites. My heart goes out to such a relationship as it is a difficult one and her faith will be put to the test daily. I know of such cases. Still, many like to quote verses that in their mind, put a woman down a few steps below him and regardless of his lifestyle and lack of love and devotion to his wife and children still believes she should "mind" him in all he says. This is not relationship as he is admonished of the Lord to love his wife even as Christ loves the church and gave himself for it...Ephesians 5:25. It's a mutual respect that God intended, one for the other.

Ephesians 5:23
For the husband is the head of the wife - This is the reason which the apostle gives for his injunctions...as for the Lord...

He is the Savior of the body - As Christ exercises authority over the Church so as to save and protect it, so let the husband exercise authority over his wife by protecting, comforting, and providing her with every necessary and comfort of life, according to his power.

This is Matthew Poole's Commentary on this verse...

Ephesians 5:23
Ver. 23. For the husband is the head of the wife; superior to her by God's ordination in authority and dignity, as the head in the natural body, being the seat of reason, and the fountain of sense and motion, is more excellent than the rest of the body.
Even as Christ is the head of the church: see Eph 1:22; Col 1:18. The particle as notes not equality, but likeness, Christ being the Head of the church in a more excellent way than the husband is of the wife.

And he is the saviour of the body; i.e. Christ is the Saviour of his church, implying that so likewise the husband is given to the wife to be a saviour to her, in maintaining, protecting, and defending her; and therefore the wife, if she regard her own good, should not grudge to be subject to him.

Ephesians 5:24 (KJV) Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

In every thing - That is, every lawful thing; for it is not intimated that they should obey their husbands in any thing criminal, or in any thing detrimental to the interests of their souls. The husband may be profligate, and may wish his wife to become such also; he may be an enemy to true religion, and use his authority to prevent his wife from those means of grace which she finds salutary to her soul; in none of these things should she obey him.

 

[Quath]

You are saying that you used to be a Christian, so you are not any more.I May I ask why you left God?

Basically, when I was 10, I learned of the birds and the bees and I had lost what I saw was evidence of God (making babies). Also, I learned of the truth of Santa Claus. So I sit in my room and I wonder why I had thought Santa was real. I felt a little as if a joke had been played on me. I realized that I had been fooled with the toothfairy, easter bunny and Santa Claus. So what magical being was next?

As soon as I had thought that I wondered if it was God but quickly dismissed it. But I couldn't. I kept wondering how I knew God was real when I had as much evidence for Him as I did for Santa. The difference was that God is suppose to answer prayers. So I prayed. I just wanted to know that God was there.

After three years I kind of gave up. Not fully, but I no longer looked. I realized I no longer believed. But I had an idea. If God were good, He would understand why my belief went away and would not send me to hell. If He did send me to hell because I couldn't find proof of Him, then He was not a deity I would have wanted to worship anyway.

So I became atheist at age 13, though I didn't know the word then. I had enjoyed being Chistian and all the activities in the church (baptist, methodist and presbyterian). I liked Bible school. The sermons tended to make me sleepy though. I didn't want to leave the religion and belief, but I couldn't stay either.

I hope you don't see that as a cop-out.

Not a cop-out because I am trying to see how you see it. Personally, I think the problem of evil is too hard to reconcile without a deist type of god.

We were made in His image, which was good, and we were supposed to stay that way. But Adam and Eve ate of the tree and then understood both good and evil. Before that, they were ignorant - they say ignorance is bliss.

Yeah, this is the tough part. If God made sinners (us) then He made something contrary to what He is. Even if you throw in free will, then God made free will, that is against what He is. Somehow, you have perfection creating imperfection, which seems contrary.

I once reread this story and tried to find alternative ways to read this. One that I liked was reading it as if God is introducing Himself to mankind. He picks up an assortment of animals (maybe on something like a spaceship or a hidden land). He finds the human intelligent and learns the languags as Adam names the animals for him. Adam is lonely and God goes out and finds a woman for him.

There could be a lot of details here like the serpent could just be a speaker. But the gist is that Adam and Eve are given a choice. They can stay here in Eden, which is just a zoo. They would be safe and carefee. Or they could go back to the harshness of the world, where they may die, but adventure many possibilities await. They choose to leave.

So the story changes from one of punishment to one of choice. I don't believe this story, but it seems to make more sense scientifically and plotwise. (Did God really think Adam would find a suitable mate among the animals?) It is heresy, but I think it makes for a better story.

Quath

 

[Klee shay]

1. You didn't show me - you just went after my attitude.

Attitude is precisely what is responsible for not treating people properly.

I showed you...you just demonstrated your inability to register it as important. How can you represent a woman as Christ would have you, if you FIRST don't listen to her?

2. You are wrong here - how do you know we haven't shared the issues anyway? Just because other couples may not know one another doesn't mean we have to be that way. My wife trusts me to speak on her behalf for I know what she would say and think. We both know each other's convictions on issues - we trust each other.

It demonstrates RESPECT if when you speak on her behalf, you actually mirror her sentiments. If you have a gift in a wonderful wife AVBunyan; that you love and respect dearly; don't hide her under a bushell so that your opinion takes centre stage.

3. You are terribly wrong here. I believe my wife to be one of the finest, faithful, and knowledge Christian women you will meet. She was straight A's in high school and college and is homeschooling 10 children - with half of the materialsl she wrote herself (with one enrolled with full scholarship in civil engineering). She is no doormat and she knows the scriptures quite well and can defend them quite well if need be. With the views of some of the women here you would have a hard time convincing my wife your stand is scriiptural.

Intelligence has nothing to do with being a doormat. One can be stupid; one could be blind or one could be so smart they miss the nuts and bolts of real life. I like that you are defending her AVBunyan - that shows respect. What you don't realise however is that it appears you don't trust your wife's communication abilities, otherwise you would have no problem with her sharing in a discussion forum, like the OP's husband.

If she chooses not to participate then that is her choice. Your opinion on the matter of women discussing these things on forums however; just made her choice look insignificant and like you are controlling her.

You call men who allow women an opinion in the church whimpy or weak; but it takes a stronger man to not fear a women's opinion and to actually let her prove herself, rather than comparing her performance to Eve before she even gets a chance to demonstrate WHAT GOD means to her.

If your wife happens to believe the same things you do; then it will work out for you both. Don't then take that comparrison to other people's marriages though and make out that the women aren't in their proper place.

If your wife was allowed the choice to choose as you say she has; then please allow other women to choose also without your commentary on their motivations. It shows them no respect and it shows their husbands no respect either. Joseph kept his wife Mary after God gave him a vision. Imagine how the men in his time thought of him however, when it appeared she had slept around and Joseph didn't put her away?

There are many reasons why God will ask a man to "defy the standard" and many reasons why God will ask a woman to "represent" him.

4. She would use the word "submissive" like the bible says - not obedient. You use obedient for it appears you are trying to make me a dictator. Children are told to obey and she is no child.

Then why do you have a pre-conceived idea of what is acceptable for her to do, or what other women should do?

Unfortunately AVBunyan, not all men treat their wives with the kind of respect God asked men to give their wives. In this case a Christian woman will look to Christ to console her; as she does her best to keep her part of the marriage deal. If Christ has shown her that she is worth respecting; then she isn't going to forget Christ and be submissive when her husband does wrong. She should be allowed to remind him of the teachings of Christ; without being told she is related to Eve and therefore untrustworthy.

When she is representing the things Christ has shown her - how can that be untrustworthy?

If she wanted to (and she wouldn't by her own choice) she would get on this forum (and she wouldn't because she wouldn't care to for she feels forums are of little use and I can't argue with her here plus she doesn't have the time) and she would defend my and her views quite well - I don't make my wife do anything - she got the above convictions on her own by reading the scriptures and being under sound preaching for over 22 years thank you kindly.

You need not defend your position with your wife's. I can fully accept that she shares the same beleifs as you and I think no less of her for doing so. There is a place for maritial unity and my desire is not to discredit that union - it is God's union.

Sometimes there are better ways to represent a certain teaching in the bible that will not offend.

5. Hypothetically speaking - I trust my wife 100% and trust her judgment in all areas - she has more liberty than most wives - she wouldn't even think of doing such a thing - not because I "told her not to" but because she knew it would be improper to discuss doctrinal things with men without me being aware of it. Her conviction - not just mine.

You said previously, "she got the above convictions on her own by reading the scriptures and being under sound preaching for over 22 years." My guess is the preachers were all male and they were all married to submissive wives who didn't have an opinion either.

While I respect her right to choose what is right for her life; not all women will live the same experience and choose the same understanding. It depends on the father-figures in their lives. If they are trustworthy father figures then learning to be submissive is actually desirable. If the father figures are not trustworthy however; then learning to be submissive is actually undesirable.

This is why you get women challenging the teachings of male authority today.

Now - you indicated my attitude was less than acceptable and I judged men and women - please re-read your response to me and tell me you didn't judge me or my wife - which doesn' really bother me a bit - this is a forum.

I judged the words which came out of your mouth. I did not judge the people involved in those words.

And with the last point (#5) I feel uncomfortable even talking about these matters with another women and quite possibly violated my own convictions here so I willl cease but I also responded so others to view also.

I appreciate that that is how you feel, but how is it violating your convictions when you are talking about representing Christ? Did Christ only speak to the men and boys of this world? No - he had the respect to address women and their concerns as well. He did not treat them like a sub-species to be avoided because Eve stuffed up.

Ask yourself why you feel unomfortable - is it something Christ has made you feel?

Now - really - I apprecaite your thoughts and can understand why you would have such a hard time with me and my stand so no hard feelings here.

No hard feelings either. If I come on strong it is because in the past I have been subjected to poor male decisions over my life as well. Men with the position of authority over women should realise that while they might do their best to uphold the Lord's words - it doesn't mean all men will.

When you find a woman wanting her voice to be heard - look to her past. She may have never had a man to trust or rely on before, so how is she going to let a man have rule over her life again? These women simply aren't going to believe the scriptual rule of men's authority over women; when men haven't obeyed the equal obligation to love women as they love themselves.

This is another case (for these women) of applying the love of God; rather than the scriptual standard of the Jewish era. When the words of God are delivered with his love; no woman can be threatened by it. No woman ever felt threatened by Christ. :D

 

[D46]

When the words of God are delivered with his love; no woman can be threatened by it. No woman ever felt threatened by Christ.

And, no Godly woman should feel threatened by a Chrislike, loving man she calls her husband as well, if he's where he should be in the Lord-Amen and amen.

 

[Klee shay]

if he's where he should be in the Lord

This is why I find the Eve complex a rather tragic cop-out. If Adam had been her husband and directed her "as God instructed"; then Eve wouldn't have been deceived by the serpent.

Eve may have been deceived but only because her husband wasn't watching out for her. I must say at this point they both made a decision to defy what God had told them to do. They were BOTH negligent in their duties and they BOTH put something else before God.

Which is why God will use BOTH vessels to bring about understanding in Christ.

*EDITED to add: D46, not having a go at you or anything. Where I quoted you, sparked a thought is all. :D *

 

[AVBunyan]

1. How can you represent a woman as Christ would have you, if you FIRST don't listen to her?

2. If you have a gift in a wonderful wife AVBunyan; that you love and respect dearly; don't hide her under a bushell so that your opinion takes centre stage.

3. What you don't realize however is that it appears you don't trust your wife's communication abilities, otherwise you would have no problem with her sharing in a discussion forum, like the OP's husband.

4. If your wife was allowed the choice to choose as you say she has; then please allow other women to choose also without your commentary on their motivations.

5. Sometimes there are better ways to represent a certain teaching in the bible that will not offend.

6. My guess is the preachers were all male and they were all married to submissive wives who didn't have an opinion either.

7. No - he had the respect to address women and their concerns as well. He did not treat them like a sub-species to be avoided because Eve stuffed up.

1. Where do you get the idea that I do not listen to my wife? You assume much don’t you.

2. I don’t hide her – I protect her – part of my duty. If she really wanted to chat I’d let her. After I told her of this thread she thought it would be interesting to sign on as Mrs. AVBunyan and have a whirl so you would get her perspective – that would have been real interesting.

3. Oh, I trust her but I respect the devil’s wiles also. He took out Eve and a lot more after her. The devil knows women real well – he knows their weaknesses even if they don’t – he’s been studying them for 6,000 years.

4. Other women are not my responsibility – I have no authority over them and do no seek it.

5. I’ve discussed this issue before in a polite and respectful manner many a times and the outcome was the same.

6. One preacher – male. And yes, he is blessed with a submissive wife who has an old nature just like mine does. There you go again - assuming what you don’t know – where do you get the idea that my preacher’s wife and mine don’t have valid opinions? Amazing.

7. Are you telling me that because of what I believe that I treat women as a sub-species?

Have a nice weekend 8-)

 

[Klee shay]

1. Where do you get the idea that I do not listen to my wife? You assume much don’t you.

Firstly you haven't mastered the art of listening to women in general (based on this discussion) and secondly, your only defence in this matter is "show me where I've done as you say I've done". Then when I show you, you deny that my analysis has any merit.

Like I said, you have to be able to listen in order to communicate. If you cannot give my analysis any merit then all you're doing is touting your role of authority without any real maturity in Christ to use it effectively.

2. I don’t hide her – I protect her – part of my duty. If she really wanted to chat I’d let her. After I told her of this thread she thought it would be interesting to sign on as Mrs. AVBunyan and have a whirl so you would get her perspective – that would have been real interesting.

I would welcome an opportunity to speak with your wife.

3. Oh, I trust her but I respect the devil’s wiles also. He took out Eve and a lot more after her. The devil knows women real well – he knows their weaknesses even if they don’t – he’s been studying them for 6,000 years.

Friend the only way the devil took out Eve, was because her husband Adam wasn't doing his job of looking after her now was he? Do you think the devil doesn't know REAL MEAN well over thousands of years either? You talk about protecting women, but all you seem to do is throw them before yourself and any scrutinity. It seems the enemy is playing you like a fiddle as well.

4. Other women are not my responsibility – I have no authority over them and do no seek it.

If you truly believed you had no authority over women (or seek it) then why did you even bother contributing to this debate? Don't tell me one thing and then do the other. You came here to speak with authority based on the rule in your house and your understanding of the bible.

Here you are supposedly teaching but then you say it's not your responsibility to teach. Which is it?

5. I’ve discussed this issue before in a polite and respectful manner many a times and the outcome was the same.

As I have not seen these particular discussions (although I do not doubt they exist) I cannot comment.

6. One preacher – male. And yes, he is blessed with a submissive wife who has an old nature just like mine does. There you go again - assuming what you don’t know – where do you get the idea that my preacher’s wife and mine don’t have valid opinions? Amazing.

Are you saying she had any female preachers at all or only one male preacher? I did not say your opinions weren't valid. I merely said the men were allowed their's, while their wives would be submissive. There YOU go again, finding ammunition to put in my hand so you can belive what you want.

7. Are you telling me that because of what I believe that I treat women as a sub-species?

Let me put it to you this way. If you obey the Lord's command to love your wife as you would love yourself...would there be any need for a debate about whether women can contribute to discussions like these or not?

If you have the right to an opinion and you love your wife and give her equal rights; then why don't you treat all women the same? You came into this discussion bagging women and men who supported their wives to have their own voice. It seems the only women you're prepared to listen to or support are those who do not challenge your role of authority as you see it.

I have duely noted in your rebuttle that you have used many "women" associated blame comments; yet not once did you quote my concerns for men's inability to use their responsibility over women properly. You cannot use this role of authority God has given you to create a smoke screen for the men who will fall short of the mark.

You talk about protecting women. All I see is Eve constantly being used as a smoke screen. In the entire life of Christ and of all his teachings in the bible - show me where he once blamed Eve for anything? By my recollection; he spoke about Adam a lot. Perhaps because he recognised Adam's authority and did not perceive Eve as a threat.

By your definition, women cannot be trusted to teach anything about Christ with authority, because Eve was the one who first deceived Adam. The women who continue to view themselves like this and the men who like to remind them of their place - are not living in the freedom of Christ. If guilt and persecution are the only things which sustain the argument that women should not have authority in church - then men have proven they cannot hold the position of authority either. For Christ did not blame the events of this world on Eve. He was the CURE to all BLAME associated to mankind. He became the reason why blame had no place in the heart of a believer.

 

[Klee shay]

Have a nice weekend 8-)

I hope you and your lovely wife do as well. :D

While I may disagree with some of your interpretations of women...I'm glad to see that the relationship with your wife is a successful one.

 

[joyinhim]

AV bunyan,

Now, you have been answering to every one's confrontation, would you answer mine also which you avoided in my thread? thank you.

My OSAS thread, thank you.

I'm still not sure what ones you are refrring to but at any rate I think I'll probably pass - I don't really discuss OSAS like folks think I do - I discuss justification. For if one is off on OSAS then he is off on justification.

If you think you can lose it then you most likely don't have justificaton settled and need to get justification settled and then you won't have issues with OSAS.

If you want to know what I believe or answers to your questions then search my posts on justification - there are enough of them.

God bless 8-)

AVbanyion, you insulted me big time. the way you talked to me is not much of Christian. you gave me a personal attack.