Hath God said,"Men Rule?"
Hath God said,"Men Rule?"
Oh, get over your misogenysm!
Men ruling over women was part of the curse.
Jesus lifted the curse for those in Christ.
Men are to submit to their wives as wives submit to their husbands.
What's up with this kind of thread? are we Christians, or Barbarians? Threads like these make the devil happy with all the strife they bring. :-(
Men ruling over women or women ruling over men. Both are out of order. The Holy Spirit is supposed to rule in the life of the Husband and the wife. They mutually submit to the Spirit of Christ in each other. Be careful that you are not doing Satan's work. Eve was innocently through her ignorance deceived, but Adam was willful disobedience.
"Henceforth it is also war by Satan upon the womanhood of the world, in malignant revenge for the verdict of the garden. Yes, war by the trampling down of women in all lands where the deceiver reigns. And war upon women in Christian lands too, by the continuance of his Eden method of misinterpreting the WORD OF GOD: insinuating into men's minds throughout all succeeding ages that God pronounced a "curse" upon the woman, when in truth she was pardoned and blessed; and instigating fallen men to personally carry out this supposed curse, though in truth it was a CURSE UPON THE DECEIVER and not upon the deceived one (Gen. 3:14).
"I will put enmity between thee and the woman," said God, as well as between "thy seed and her seed," and this vindictive enmity of the hierarchy of evil toward women, and especially believers, has not lessened in its intensity from that day."
War on the Saints - Jessie Penn-Lewis
"The order of God’s dealing with Adam and Eve and the serpent is worthy of notice. First, He spoke to Adam: "The LORD God called to the man, and said unto him, Where art thou?" Second, He called to the woman: "The LORD God said unto the woman, What is this thou hast done?" Third, He turned to the serpent as the first cause of sin, and declared, "Cursed art thou." This interrogating order was reversed when God pronounced judgment upon them. First the judgment was upon the serpent, who was cursed as the first cause, and the first in order; then God turned to the woman, and although she had been deceived, she was told she could not escape the consequent suffering; and lastly the man was told, "With the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread." The order in which God addresses the three””first the man, then the woman, then the serpent””and the reversal of it in the pronouncement of judgment””first the serpent, then the woman, then the man””is very remarkable and suggestive.
It is equally remarkable to notice that because the woman was deceived by Satan, and was not a willful transgressor, she was chosen as the means of his defeat. Paul points out in his first letter to Timothy that Adam's transgression was willful, that is, fully knowing he was doing wrong, and that there would be resulting consequences; he was not therefore chosen for the undoing of the serpent's work, but was given the part of toiling at the cursed ground for material sustenance. The woman, who had been deceived innocently, was chosen to produce the promised Seed which would bring about the absolute defeat of Satan.
In this we may learn the lesson that God will turn the very devices the enemy uses against His children into weapons for his defeat. Willful transgression brings the judgment of God upon it, even though the transgressor is
forgiven; but every single thing in which Satan may have deceived you, as an innocent victim of his wiles, can become the very cause of his defeat. May God give you that comfort through this glimpse into the fall in Eden””especially
those of God's children who have been deceived by "supernatural manifestations" which they afterwards found were not of God, and who have fallen into depression, darkness and despair.
Eve was innocently deceived by the serpent, and then in His grace God promised that through her would come the very defeat of the one who had deceived her. Yes, God can turn the very devices of the enemy into a weapon of victory over him."
Conquest of Canaan, Jessie Penn-Lewis
The headship of the husband over the wife is not misogyny. Men having godly headship over their wives and a leadership role in the church is the word and will of the Lord. This is a serious matter with spiritual and eternal implications as the below passage indicates:
"Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything."
~ Ephesians 5:22-24
It is not often I will quit listening to a sermon before the speaker finishes, but I did this one.
The speaker declares that you will not find one female priest, one prophet, one female disciple, one female bishop, etc in the WORD. He also declares that Deborah's reign was as a result of a nation gone apostate.
It is true there is not one priest in the OT; nor one prophet and that is because a female prophet is not called a prophet but a prophetess! And they existed in the OT and NT.
It is also true that most of the judges that 'ruled' Israel rose in response to a nation gone apostate. It should also be noted Deborah did not seek authority but it was given to her.
Nowhere does one find any criticism of Deborah in the WORD. Not one. No one came and told her she was "out of line". Nor does the text suggest it.
In Jesus' inner circle there were no females, but he certainly had female disciples...true, none led congregations but they functioned as helpers and took responsibility. To give them authority they were to wear the sign on their head that they are under authority just as the men were by having an uncovered head. All people are under authority and must submit to it. Jesus warned his disciples against ruling as lords over the flock. Ruling as lords contrasts sharply with servant leadership.
When I read of someone who will be critical of a Bible character - something he/she did, they way it was done or not done and the WORD is silent about it, I will no longer listen to him because if God did not rebuke this person via of a prophet or Himself, who are we to judge? Sounds arrogant to me.
Yes, I know there are people who are very aggressive in faulting Bible characters when the LORD does not even do this - wearies me. This is why I refused to listen to the end of this audio - have heard this being done before.
(Many years ago I read a famous author's writings' who was critical of Moses for delegating authority based on advice given by his father-in-law. God NEVER rebuked Moses for doing so. The audacity of moderns to fault Moses...maybe they need to teach God a few things..???)
This is my thoughts on what I heard on this audio.
Sandra
by forrests on 2016/7/1 10:37:21The headship of the husband over the wife is not misogyny. Men having godly headship over their wives and a leadership role in the church is the word and will of the Lord. This is a serious matter with spiritual and eternal implications as the below passage indicates:
"Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything."
~ Ephesians 5:22-24
Forrest,
Brenda did not say the headship of the husband was misogyny. She expressed that men have perverted the scriptures and used them for an excuse for misogyny. I know many personally who do this.
These same men conveniently forget these verses:
Ephesians 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
1 Peter 3:7
Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
Jesus doesn't like bullies. Praise God you're not a misogynist.
The definition of misogynism is;
a hatred of or hostility toward women.
Brenda, why is it that you immediately resort to name-calling?
A hatred of men may be the cause of your reaction, as well as your condition!
Have you listened to the message?
Savannah,
I would not even imply that about a sister, especially one you don't know in 3-D. C'mon, you know how it feels to be wrongly characterized. There are guys on here that have done much more than imply things about you and u so you know how it feels. Please don't go down this road with Brenda or any sister for that matter.
Julius21,
You are not Clarke Kent, and Brenda is not Lois Lane!
Stop trying to play superhero, and stop fighting with carnal weapons.
Pray,meditate,wait and then proceed to post!
Seriously???
I doubt anyone is going to respond to your acerbic post. I don't blame them.
Any man who stands up for his principles is a superman in my eyes and especially when he will incur the wrath of the persecuting side. Misogynism in the church has done more damage than anything.
Just to add that l believe that the man is to be the head and leader of the family. His role is also as protector of the woman because God knows that women have a hard time in this man's world. They have different roles but are created equal in God's sight which is sadly not obeyed in the church where they are often only good for children's work.
When God said that man will rule over the woman He knew what would happen and it has been true. Not only did the man Adam disobey God he tried to blame the woman who had been deceived so he had not protected her either.
by brenda7 on 2016/7/2 9:35:50Any man who stands up for his principles is a superman in my eyes and especially when he will incur the wrath of the persecuting side. Misogynism in the church has done more damage than anything.
It's a major scandal in the church that even respected men of God shrink back from addressing because of what they would lose. It taints Christianity and pollutes the Church's witness. It gives the enemies of Christianity a foothold to talk about why we are no different than they.
Well said Julius. We do with a lot more godly men like you.
"Men are to submit to their wives as wives submit to their husbands."
This is not true. There is not one shred of biblical support for such a statement. Ephesians 5:21 does not make Ephesians 5:22-33 void, and Galatians 3:28 does not contradict it nor make it void either (actually, it has absolutely nothing to do with the subject, though self-proclaimed "Christian Feminists" do try to use it to void whole passages of scripture in order to preserve their erroneous doctrine).
There is no clear command for men to "submit to their wives" in scripture. But there is at least one where wives are instructed to "be subject" to their husbands "in everything" - "as unto the Lord".
That is not misogyny - it's the word of the LORD.
I do not "lord over" my wife's faith or rule over her in a spiritual sense, but in things natural I do have the authority. This does not necessarily contradict love and meekness and humility - even though in the minds of some it apparently does.
Also, I am tasked with teaching my wife the truth of God and we are really counted as one person in God's eyes - in accordance with Jesus' teaching that "what God has joined together, let not man put asunder." Just as the body is subject to the head, though not necessarily inferior to it - but necessary and glorious, and the two are interdependent: so are the husband and wife.
Authority - though often perverted and usurped and abused - is not, in itself, evil. Nor is submission to authority evil in itself; so long as it is "under God" - meaning that it is God-given authority and it is held and exercised in the fear of the LORD and according to the revealed will of God.
But denying the revealed will and word of the Lord in favor of ones own idea and concept of equity and justice is "evil" and very dangerous. It is a form of usury and rebellion.
I wonder how many people secretly believe Paul was a misogynist for (in the Spirit) forbidding women to teach or exercise authority over men in the church?
This is not "persecution" as one has stated in this thread - it is truth.
It is quite possible that Brenda meant that we should submit to the Spirit of Christ in one another but even if not, I would find it very difficult for any husband here to tell me they have not submitted to their wife in any request their wife may have made to them regarding their home, children, schooling, appointments, etc, etc, etc. Surely, your wife has spoken some wisdom to you (from the Lord) and you realized she was right and you submitted to that wisdom. My wife has also lovingly shared scriptures in a very timely way to me and of course not to submit to her, but to ponder what the Lord might be saying. Am I to tell her that only I can share the Word?
And, what about conjugal relationships? I submit to you (excuse the pun) that the way that the world uses submit is in a very "hard", militaristic way, maybe. Soften the edges a bit on the word and you will see that Christian husbands and wives submit (acquiesce) to one another all of the time. It is all wrapped up in loving and respecting one another.
Paul was not a misogynist.
We can't read Paul through the societal lens of a 21st century perspective, rather than the 1st century world in which Paul lived.
In Paul's time, women were considered their husband's property, not their partner, and they had very few rights or protections. They certainly would not have agreed with this scripture:
1Pet 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
"Heirs together of the grace of life". This is what Paul refers to when he says in Christ, there is no distinction between man and women. They both equally can receive the Holy Spirit's power to be a witness for Christ and to overcome Satan, the world and the flesh. And we have also seen God use women in very powerful ways. (Jackie Pullinger, Elizabeth Elliot, Jessie Penn-Lewis to name a few).
Probably, the most revolutionary thing about Paul's teachings about marriage in Ephesians is that husbands were to love their wives sacrificially "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it" and husbands were to nourish and cherish their wives as Christ "nourishes and cherishes" His church (Eph. 5:25, 29).
Paul's speaks about the essential equality of husband and wife (in 1 Corinthians) on the most intimate, conjugal level. He instructs the Corinthians that in marriage the husband and the wife have equal right to conjugal relations:
Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.
. . . .(I Cor. 7:3-5a, NASB).
This was written during a time where wives were considered the property of their husbands.
No, Paul was no misogynist.
Eph 5:33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.
Julius21,You are not Clarke Kent, and Brenda is not Lois Lane!
Stop trying to play superhero, and stop fighting with carnal weapons.
Pray,meditate,wait and then proceed to post!
We will not stand for such name-calling on SermonIndex forums. This is a clear warning to all believers, may we check our hearts and realize that speaking against others in the forums will not bear any fruit and it is not the right thing to do. If you cannot resist.
Colossians 3:8 New International Version (NIV)
8 But now you must also rid yourselves of all such things as these: anger, rage, malice, slander, and filthy language from your lips.
James 3:2 New International Version (NIV)
2 We all stumble in many ways. Anyone who is never at fault in what they say is perfect, able to keep their whole body in check.
Titus 3:1-2 New International Version (NIV)
Saved in Order to Do Good
3 Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good, 2 to slander no one, to be peaceable and considerate, and always to be gentle toward everyone.
Brother Greg,
I don't believe the person you quoted was calling names, but instead referring to one sister calling a brother "Superman" or referring to him as "a superman."
Though a couple times the term "Misogynist" was used (presumably in reference to those who hold a Complementarian view instead of an Egalitarian one)...
That, in my opinion, is far more derogatory of an instance of "name calling" (and far more damaging) than that which you called out...
Don't you agree?
At one point, a mention was made of alleged "persecution" that those men who ascribe to a more Egalitarian doctrine endure from the "mysogynists" in the church (again, presumably the Complementarians). This type of martyr complex and demonizing of those who disagree with you is not loving nor productive either.
Just my thoughts...for what it's worth.
Blessings, brother Greg, and thank you for giving me the opportunity to add my two cents on this website.
"Any man who stands up for his principles is a superman in my eyes and especially when he will incur the wrath of the persecuting side."
brenda7,
Given the context of the discussion, the "principles" that you are applauding are of an Egalitarian nature...is this a fair inference on my part? If so, it stands to reason that the "persecuting side" are those who disagree with his Egalitarian views - thus Complementarians. Is this also a fair inference?
If so:
Incur wrath? Such as what? Having his house or church burned down? Torture? Murder? Stoning? Beheading? I have never heard of a Complementarian ("misogynist" or otherwise) doing any of the above to an Egalitarian in my lifetime.
Such sensationalism is careless, irresponsible and unprofitable at best - and nefarious, slanderous and deceptive at worst.
"Persecuting side"? Please do explain who you are referring to here, if you would. Who in the Christian world is currently truly "persecuting" (in the true definition of the word) other Christians?
If by persecution you mean verbal/written "hostility" and "ill-treatment" - I would have to say you are the one most guilty here in this discussion based on your apparently flippant and repeated tossing around of a very serious accusation of hatred (misogynist) in the general direction of those who disagree with you.
This is closer to persecution than anything that I have seen from the (so-called) "persecution side"...
Brenda7, if I may, have you been hurt by men/a man? Or have you experienced hurtful and un-godly behavior from one claiming to have the authority of God to do so to you? I understand past wounds and the scarring they can leave on one's heart (my wife and I both have these and desperately yet need the oil of the Lord to soften our hearts in many ways where they have been hardened through the wounds of a sin-stricken world); but I do urge you to not allow your past (if this is the case with you) and the wrongs of men to cause you to harden your heart to whole groups of people and possibly even the word of God and Lord Jesus Himself...
Grace and Peace to you in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ - our Living Head.
This discussion is locked.