tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post4509986682428091749..comments2023-10-24T07:03:42.942-05:00Comments on vtmbottomline: IS MALE GENDER AUTHORITY BIBLICAL?Paul Burlesonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17021178307705707423noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-64382899104566596852012-05-01T18:54:15.864-05:002012-05-01T18:54:15.864-05:00Paul, you are sweet! But I only have time right n...Paul, you are sweet! But I only have time right now to update my blog once a week! Please don't expect more-- I've got two teenagers at home and a nearly-fulltime job.Kristenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08252374623355509404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-68352862131129351332012-05-01T08:50:15.696-05:002012-05-01T08:50:15.696-05:00George Stone,
I agree all Scripture is God-breath...George Stone,<br /><br />I agree all Scripture is God-breathed, but I disagree that all words in the Bible are Scripture.<br /><br />Since God cannot tell an untruth, any untruth in the Bible is not from God.<br /><br />More than once Jesus said he did not know that only his Father knew. I don’t understand how that ‘worked’, but an example is (John 16:32 Holman)<br /><br />“Look: An hour is coming, and has come, when each of you will be scattered to his own home, and you will leave Me along. Yet I am not alone, because the Father is with Me.”<br /><br />George, you probably agree that Jesus was referring to Calvary, but was his Father with him? <br /><br />If God was not with his Son at Calvary, then Jesus believed an untruth. The truth was revealed by “My God! My God! Why have you forsaken me?<br /><br />Kristen,<br /><br />Thanks for your words and your post. I agree that first-century husbands were in power over their wives. <br /><br />Even today where in the world are women treated as equals with men? Baptist Churches? Ha <br /><br />When Billy Graham’s daughter was asked to speak at a large gathering, over a hundred men turned their chairs backwards to show their protest because she was a woman.<br /><br />Our association does not have one woman as a deacon. Hmmmm <br /><br />When Martha asked Jesus to send Mary to the kitchen, most Baptists don’t comprehend the answer that Jesus gave put women on an equal status with men.Rex Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06976501582240117188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-81278789617838393412012-05-01T07:39:28.596-05:002012-05-01T07:39:28.596-05:00All,
I've been away in Little Rock Ark and h...All, <br /><br />I've been away in Little Rock Ark and have not been active on this post needing to put up the new one yesterday after I returned.<br /><br />I've just read the comments some of you left and Kirsten was gracious enough to answer. I need say nothing further. She said it well.<br /><br />Please go read her blog and do it regularly. I do it almost daily and if she doesn't write a new one for a few days I get to read the one she has up several times. It's worth the time spent. You'll find it here...<br /><br />http://krwordgazer.blogspot.com/<br /><br />Thanks Kirsten.Paul Burlesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17021178307705707423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-52832676315486278802012-04-30T21:03:29.209-05:002012-04-30T21:03:29.209-05:00Rex, I don't think the problem is Paul. But I...Rex, I don't think the problem is Paul. But I think that you have shown quite clearly that the complementarian way of interpreting the passages is indeed in contradiction to other things the Scriptures, and even Paul himself, say elsewhere. Unless Paul had a personality disorder or couldn't think coherently, or constantly changed his mind throughout his letters, the complementarians are misunderstanding Paul.<br /><br />George Stone, I don't think the Bible teaches that marriage is a picture of Christ and the church. Instead, a specific picture of Christ doing a specific thing for the church, is being held up as a picture our marriages are to follow: and that something is laying down His power and position in order to raise the church up to be glorious. Even so were first-century husbands, who were absolutely in power over their wives, to lay down their power and position and raise their wives up.<br /><br />Here's a link to the first part of my series on the subject, if you're interested: <br /><br />http://krwordgazer.blogspot.com/2011/10/is-marriage-really-illustration-of.htmlKristenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08252374623355509404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-88994812462081397192012-04-30T11:18:16.141-05:002012-04-30T11:18:16.141-05:00I cannot agree with anyone who supports the idea t...I cannot agree with anyone who supports the idea that anything in Scripture is "in a rut" or errant in any way. The truths of Scripture do not "blossom" from less to more truth, all Scripture is God-breathed and has final authority. Lastly, our treatment of another person, whether male or female, should center around the truth of the gospel. If marriage is meant to be a picture of Christ and his redeemed bride, then husbands and wives won't be as concerned with their rights and positions as they will the reflection of the beautiful gospel of Jesus Christ.George Stonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12400061627171941328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-38769940604746961212012-04-30T06:51:22.040-05:002012-04-30T06:51:22.040-05:00Paul,
First scripture:
“For wives, this means sub...Paul,<br /><br />First scripture:<br />“For wives, this means submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For a husband is the head of his wife as Christ is the head of the church. He is the Savior of his body, the church. As the church submits to Christ, so you wives should submit to your husbands in everything. For husbands, this means love your wives just as Christ loved the church. He gave up his life for her. (Ephesians 5:22-25 NLT) <br /><br />Let’s see; I could hire someone (wife) to work for me and they would obey (submit) to my wishes.<br /><br />But if I hired someone who would lay down their life for me (bodyguard); how much MORE would that someone submit to me?<br /><br />With this thought in mind, this scripture is saying the same thing as the preceding verse that the Pats and Comps ignore”<br /><br />“And further, submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” <br /><br />Second scripture:<br />“I do not let women teach men or have authority over them.” (1 Timothy 2:12 NLT)<br /><br />If the ‘proof’ of a statement is FALSE, then the statement is FALSE.<br /><br />Paul’s proof:<br />Verse 13: “For God made Adam first…” <br /><br />HUH? Where in the Bible is the rule that God always chose by seniority? <br /><br />Verse 14:<br />“And it was not Adam who was deceived by Satan.”<br /><br />Another huh? Paul was right---Adam wasn’t deceived—he sinned deliberately and blamed Eve. Since God didn’t accept Adam’s thinking, why would he accept the same from Paul? <br /><br />Just to show Paul’s thinking is in a rut, his next verse says:<br />“But women will be saved through childbearing…”<br />Nuff said for now.Rex Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06976501582240117188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-46458038732464044832012-04-29T23:34:19.891-05:002012-04-29T23:34:19.891-05:00Paul,
AH! The old age discussion of different vie...Paul,<br />AH! The old age discussion of different view-points on what the Bible says, means, and the BIG question if what is said is TRUE.<br /><br />With the background of “In youth we learn; in age we understand.” Marie von Ebner-Eschenbach, lets look at SOME scripture.<br /><br />For example, did Peter know ‘everything’ at Pentecost, or did he learn truth with age?<br /><br />At Pentecost, did he believe Jesus died for Gentiles, or was it after God gave him a vision?<br /><br />At Pentecost, Peter said, “Each of you must repent of your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. THEN you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38 NLT)<br /><br />Peter was still a “youth” in learning WHEN a person became a Christian and received the Holy Spirit, but later he “understood” after seeing Gentiles receive the Holy Spirit BEFORE they were baptized that baptism was NOT required to be saved as some Christians teach. <br /><br />With that said, and since the hour is late, I’ll pull a Paul Burleson and say more is coming with the scripture that he referenced.Rex Rayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06976501582240117188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-78478660584114985402012-04-29T13:27:56.981-05:002012-04-29T13:27:56.981-05:00Lovin your blog! I'm going to start following ...Lovin your blog! I'm going to start following your blog, hope you do the same!Bissyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05332485084127206324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-18785073615268877912012-04-27T17:17:13.421-05:002012-04-27T17:17:13.421-05:00Paul,
Apparently there are something like 234 dif...Paul,<br /><br />Apparently there are something like 234 different isms. Every one of them represent a philosophical, political or moral doctrine or a belief system, which is one reason I believe that the belief system of many who claim to be Christian has degenerated into being a mere ism (Christianism). <br /><br />In my opinion the terms you are speaking about, which have become the subject of much debate on the web, and the pet subjects of some who regard themselves as experts on each position, have become a part of the degeneration previously mentioned. They have become a point of doctrine which either includes a person to,or excludes them from being a faithful member of the Body of Christ.<br /><br />That in itself has caused me to avoid discussing the matter because the Scriptures make no such division.<br /><br />My opinion is that the Patriarchalism of the Old Covenant, which is a form of social organization in which a male is the family head and title is traced through the male line, as amongst the Old Covenant people.<br /><br />It has no place in the life of a New Covenant people who, both male and female, have a common Father revealed in our Saviour, the Lord, Jesus Christ, who is the sole Head of the Family of God.<br /><br />The latter fact, in my opinion, eliminates any need for discussion about the other two, each of which have some salient points; e.g. men and women do have complimentary roles, but this does not compromise, in any way, that in God's economy of things they are absolute equality in all things, as asserted in Galatians 3.Aussie Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16199918171163666399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-67644997821523508242012-04-27T16:22:58.891-05:002012-04-27T16:22:58.891-05:00Off the C,
Tucked among all the fine points of yo...Off the C,<br /><br />Tucked among all the fine points of your comment is this one point that will..A- give a hint as to my own stance on this issue and ..B- cause me to say I could not agree more...<br /><br />."Neither a Patriarchal mindset, nor a Complementation mindset accomplishes that goal. Only when the two can, once again, become one will God’s image be restored in mankind and He will once again pronounce that “It is very good.” <br /><br />Good stuff Off the C. Thanks.Paul Burlesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17021178307705707423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-84928450447731386952012-04-27T14:03:34.910-05:002012-04-27T14:03:34.910-05:00In the book of Genesis, the book of beginnings, th...In the book of Genesis, the book of beginnings, there is a very narrow window through which we can view creation before it was infected with sin. It is exciting to read about each day’s creation and the Creators proclamation that “It is good.” It is especially exciting to read about the creation of mankind on day six, and the proclamation that it is very good. Looking through that narrow window of time before sin entered the world we can see a perfect picture of the kind of relationship that God intended for a man and a woman.<br />• Mankind was made in the image of God. Each gender bears some qualities of His image but it is together that his image is most clearly reflected.<br />• God created mankind to be different but without division. In the beginning God revealed the plurality of his nature (Let Us). The plurality of mankind’s nature is reflected in gender (male and female.) We readily see, in the nature of God, the absence of strife and division. Therefore, there should be no strife or division in the relationship between a man and woman. Strife and division is clearly the result of sin.<br />• God created mankind, and even though it was a two-step process, God made it very clear that the two should become one. Adam indicated that he understood when he said, “She is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh.” <br />• God placed mankind (אָדָם ) in the garden to tend to it. Before sin, there was no separation of labor, purpose or role. Eve was a “help meet” to Adam, and likewise, Adam was a “help meet” to Eve. <br />• Before sin entered the world both Adam and Eve stood equally in the presence of God, neither one before the other.<br />• Before sin entered the world Adam and Eve stood in the presence of each other in innocence without shame.<br />When sin entered the world it destroyed all of the above. Christ came in order to redeem and restore us from the ravages of sin. How can we proclaim Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior while clinging to and justifying the destruction that sin brought to the relationship between man and woman? Our goal as Christian men and women should be to strive for the ideal that is so clearly demonstrated in that narrow window before sin entered the world. Neither a Patriarchal mindset, nor a Complementation mindset accomplishes that goal. Only when the two can, once again, become one will God’s image be restored in mankind and He will once again pronounce that “It is very good.”Off The Cuffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00630768359355117670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-84586001695970714552012-04-27T05:31:08.222-05:002012-04-27T05:31:08.222-05:00Off the C,
You certainly don't need to wait t...Off the C,<br /><br />You certainly don't need to wait to respond. Whatever you wish to say about any one of the views is perfectly legitimate. Say away. I'd love to hear from you.<br /><br /><br />Aussie J,<br /><br />If this can help with your friends I'll be more than pleased.<br /><br />I'm interested in any information or insights you will have on it as I am with O the C.Paul Burlesonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17021178307705707423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-21459353005626878562012-04-26T15:31:15.883-05:002012-04-26T15:31:15.883-05:00Paul,
Thank you for this, as it will be very help...Paul,<br /><br />Thank you for this, as it will be very helpful to a very dear brother whose wife is influenced by the Pat. teaching coming through a branch of the home schooling movement.<br /><br />Of course :),I'm pleased that it supports what I've attempted to share with him,as well.<br /><br />Looking forward to the next part.Aussie Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16199918171163666399noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28605099.post-86363988015659359392012-04-26T11:35:38.869-05:002012-04-26T11:35:38.869-05:00Bro. Paul,
I am eager to respond to your last two ...Bro. Paul,<br />I am eager to respond to your last two questions. However, I will refrain and await your next post. Having read your previous entries, I expect that I will be pleased with your answers.<br /><br />Have a great day. <br />God Bless!Off The Cuffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00630768359355117670noreply@blogger.com