know we no man after the flesh

You read the same Bible I do and you are probable smarter than me.
I wish to stand along on this issue if I may and hear your side of the issue.
I will explain as best as I can to those that wish to read the following.

I held the same view in the past as you on the topic of marriage.

I will not fight you,
I will turn the other cheek.
I have no agenda

I believe I am a lamb or babe, not a sheep.
I believe in son ship by becoming a spiritual man in Christ

I believe that Adam and Eve were equals before the fall.
I believe they were one flesh before God cursed them.
One of the curses God put on Eve was, “he shall rule over thee.”
God didn’t ask anyone’s opinion or how they felt about it.
I believe the Bible is true.Every word about marriage printed in the Bible from Genesis 3-16 is true including Galatians chapter 3 verse 25 through the rest of the Book which you can read yourself and if you are permitted please ignore the chapters divisions that were not part of the original scrolls

Are men willing to exclude females in the death, burial and resurrection in Christ.
I can not find definite Biblical support for my wife’s salvation through me or by me.

God didn’t ask anyone’s opinion or how they felt when He said “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 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.

I wish to live by every word.

In brotherly love

2 Corinthians 5
For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
15. And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
16. Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.
17. Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
18. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
19. To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
20. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
21. For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Define submission, equal, one, and any other key words in this discussion. An online dictionary won't suffice. Define these words in context of scripture. To what aspect of who is who submitting? Does submission mean "un-equalness" ? Pray about these things brother. If you really want to know God will reveal this to you also. Do you really want to know? Why? Or maybe I should restate the question: Why now? You are already married. You have been a Christian for several years. What is the purpose of this discussion? Was it not addressed in the thread "Out of Order Fellowship"? You say: "I held the same view in the past as you on the topic of marriage." As who? What is this view you allude too? What happened? Did this view change before or after you were married? Is it a view or a conviction? You say: "you are probable smarter than me." Who is? On what basis? Why is this said? What does it matter? I've seen some of the most unintelectual couples lead the most godly marriages.

Who am I to discuss these matters? Am I not still a boy?

joshua

Reply to Fredrick

Submission, My wife can not serve two masters. Read Matthew 6:24 with out the verse separations and punctuation out loud. The way the “ drunk man” situated the chapters and verses many times can lead to confusion.

I believe man was a generic word meaning both males [sons of Man] and females [daughters of Man] collectively in the[ family of Man] before being redefined after the fall to distinguish the different roles in the family of [men]

One [son of Man] and the devil produced Cain
Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Two [sons of Man] one female and one male produced righteous Able.
By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.

Genesis 6
1. And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
2. That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
3. And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

When [sons of Man] were no longer spiritually quickened they began to take the carnal roles of men and women.

Jesus [The Son of Man] was never fallen.

Matthew:
But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.)

Brother the oil in my lamp needs replenishing. Good nigh Friedrick

I believe man was a generic word meaning both males [sons of Man] and females [daughters of Man] collectively in the[ family of Man] before being redefined [b]after the fall[/b] to distinguish the different roles in the family of [men]

A little farther back,

[i]And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.[/i] Gen 2:18

Brother, the distinctions were made well before the fall. By a wonderful and beautiful design. It is our mis-defining that cannot grapple with equals as intended, I would say even that our measure of equality is to suit our particular selfishness more often than not.

We are equal in sin and equal in death. Equal in falling short and equal in salvation. Who we are and what we were created for as to 'office' or the 'job you have to do' is not the same as equality. In these roles there is truly a subservience to each other, [i]first to the Lord[/i], then ... to each other.

Maybe here is a good place for a remembrance of a great comment by Philologos. He is often fond of saying and you must get the gist of this as not pedantic but; "[i]Bible words have histories, not definitions[/i]."

Subservient, submission, servant-hood ... Just what comes to mind as it pertains to these things;

[i]But Jesus called them to him and said, "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. It shall not be so among you. But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be your slave, even as the Son of Man [u]came not to be served but to serve, and to give[/u] his life as a ransom for many." [/i] Mat 20:25-28

To serve and to give. John 3:16. To suffer our rights, even our 'wrongs', ([i]why do you not suffer wrong?[/i]). Many, many examples throughout scripture.

When [sons of Man] were no longer spiritually quickened they began to take the carnal roles of men and women.

Dear brother, there is absolutely nothing carnal about the roles of men and women, it's what we ourselves have done to these God ordained and designed roles ... Oh it breaks my heart that we not only cannot see these things but that we would keep rebelling against them.

I would be quite amazed and distraught if my cat suddenly began barking at the moon. And am just as equally distraught when men are apt to put on an effeminate garment, that is in their disposition, as for a woman to lord over a misconstrued understanding upon a man. It's out of sync even instinctively. We have a greater misunderstanding that equates submission with superiority and then further instigates our pride as to betterment and ... ruler-ship if I may.

There are distinctions and they are tremendous. Look to our Lord. It is an amazing, incredible matter.

Php 2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

Php 2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

Php 2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

Bring all these to bear in these considerations of submission, subservience, servant-hood. And perhaps one more when it comes to ruler-ship;

Mat 26:53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

Set aside. Holding back. Letting go of one's 'rights'. Equal, as not something to be grasped nor 'robbery' in our Lords profound revealing.

Roles and responsibilities. Beauty, wonder and awe in the intricacies of design. We say that a woman is beautiful and a man handsome, they are not opposed to each other, they are descriptive and complimentary. I spoke elsewhere of how we ought to be championing these incredible attributes of women as the scriptures speak of them, just as example from 1 Peter;

[i]While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear[/i] (reverential)

[i]Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning ... But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.

... For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves ...

Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honor unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.[/i]

In [i]Gods[/i] sight. After this manner. "Adorned". Giving Honor. And then ...

[i]being heirs together[/i]

Is this not the truest equality?

"Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge,"

A personal note. This may well be the verse for the year, even a carry over from last. "According to knowledge" is also rendered 'with understanding'. And that means far less to do with the mathematical firings of brain cells, but with a certain subservient disposition to very bluntly put it, keeping my big mouth shut in large part. And at the same time studying out the very wretchedness that is ready to let the evil member of the body loose in the first place.

Probably enough here.

Well said, Mike and others as well.

When I first read the original post, I wondered "what is the issue?" "What is the point?". Was still a tad bit baffled until Mike's post....

But I have a lingering question: "If we are bought with the blood of Jesus, serve him with heart, soul and mind, why is submission an issue, really!?" Serving Jesus means submission of my entire being. In serving him it means I serve others. Plain and simple. This is what Jesus did. Now God also made males and females for several reasons and after the fall he said the female is to serve the husband: "He shall rule over thee; "wives submit to your OWN husbands."(Not someone else's!) So if you are married this is you calling, ladies, and men, if you are married, you are commanded to love your wife as Christ loved the church." It is all about submission, everywhere. It is how we serve the LORD: Men who leads also have to submit to authority: to God's and woe on them when they don't! When they do, it enhances their leadership abilities/capabilities.

Seems like everyone wants to be what they ain't: children want to be older - can't wait until they get driver's license, out of school, etc.; women want to males because they perceive they have added advantages denied them; males want to be god and rule everything, and be bigger then anybody else. All screwed up. And you know who is responsible for that!

One thing people need to learn is to be content. Modern advertising is geared to make people discontent with what they have. This is not consistent with Bible teaching, is it? When females imbibe this mentality, it spills over into the marriage relationship. People equate possessions with happiness and that happiness is very short-lived. So when this emotion is fed, it's appetite grows ever larger, more demanding. This is called covetousness and it is sin. And fuels rebellion.

Philologos. He is often fond of saying and you must get the gist of this as not pedantic but; "Bible words have histories, not definitions."

This reminds me what we were taught in Bible School: if you want to know what the Bible says about a subject, take a concordance, paper, pencil and your "word" and write down what the Bible says about it. You start in Genesis and go all the way through to Revelation. By that time you will KNOW. And it works.

Blessings,
ginnyrose

Seems like everyone wants to be what they ain't:

Someday I will get around to shorter more poignant statements ...

Well said sister. Left off lingering that I may have botched that word 'ruler-ship' and its defining. These are God's dictates; "Do this".

And maybe if anything I was going after the manner, the penchant, the compulsion ... the reasonings or is it weaseling out of what we ought to ... be.

One thing people need to learn is to be content. Modern advertising is geared to make people discontent with what they have. This is not consistent with Bible teaching, is it? When females imbibe this mentality, it spills over into the marriage relationship. People equate possessions with happiness and that happiness is very short-lived. So when this emotion is fed, it's appetite grows ever larger, more demanding. This is called covetousness and it is sin. And fuels rebellion.

There's an axe to the root if I ever heard the sound of it.

Reply to Mike
wow. I've never been indirectly accused of wearing effeminate[sissy] clothes. My preference of clothing for my flesh are denim jeans and overalls and a straw hat. I have numerous articles of each.

My preference in the spirit is to be clothed in righteousness by putting on Christ. My gender in the Body of Christ will be the same as His when He appears.

Reply to ginnyrose
No my posts are not a conviction of hidden sin or a latent homosexuality. I am a heterosexual man with out deviation or diversion.

I just have to share this.

I signed off and told my wife now they think I'm a homosexual who wears sissy clothes.

She laughed and said mercy me, and then overalls?

You may have had to been here.