Pursuing a Man vs. Waiting to be Pursued

[MacFall]

God created man to have authority over woman and to be the leader.

Prove it.

Just to hopefully nip the obvious line of discussion in the bud: when God said man would reign over woman at Eden He was pronouncing an effect of the curse of sin. It, as with the rest of the curse, was never according to His design; and Christ has redeemed us from that curse and all the aspects thereof. The spiritual peril of trying to live according to the curse when Christ died to free us from it cannot be overstated.

 

[Strider1002]

If you don't want to pursue a woman, Mac, you don't have to. No need to justify a personal preference.

 

[MacFall]

If you don't want to pursue a woman, Mac, you don't have to. No need to justify a personal preference.

How generous. Now, if only those who are trying to make a moral commandment against female initiative would agree with you...

 

[Spunkn]

Prove it.

Just to hopefully nip the obvious line of discussion in the bud: when God said man would reign over woman at Eden He was pronouncing an effect of the curse of sin. It, as with the rest of the curse, was never according to His design; and Christ has redeemed us from that curse and all the aspects thereof. The spiritual peril of trying to live according to the curse when Christ died to free us from it cannot be overstated.

I'm not going to get into a discussion about it here. That was my not my intent, and I don't want to derail the thread.

Though maybe I already did heh.

 

[MacFall]

Sorry, but you're not going to get away with making statements like that without backing them up. If you refuse to discuss it then I accept your concession of the point.

 

[Amber.ly]

I'm not going to get into a discussion about it here. That was my not my intent, and I don't want to derail the thread.

Though maybe I already did heh.

Don't take the bait. Mac just likes to argue and lead people down rabbit trails to derail their points.

 

[MacFall]

I don't like to argue, but I like it even less when people try to impose absurd post-medieval values on other people and use scripture to do it. And it's hardly beside the point to ask why they do it. Christ freed us from the curse that set man above woman. What right has anyone to bring the curse back? And how dare they use scripture to do so?

 

[Spunkn]

Fine. But if people want the conversation about it to stop, then I will.

1 Timothy 2:12-15 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15 But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.

I dont think this verse is saying woman can't say anything, but it is referring to an authority that Adam was granted over Eve, and that men are given over women.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

My purpose here, is not to bash women. Far from it. Nor to say what they can and cannot do. My only purpose in showing these verses is to show that there is some authority man is given over women. Why would women be told to go and ask their husbands at home if the husband was not the authority in such things?

Ephesians 5:22-23 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 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.

As the above verse says, it's a picture of Christ as the head of the church. Doesn't mean we're "better" than women or anything.

 

[Strider1002]

I'll make a new thread.

 

[Spunkn]

Don't take the bait. Mac just likes to argue and lead people down rabbit trails to derail their points.

I'll leave it at just one post then. Anyway....back on topic.

 

[Paulie079]

I don't like to argue, but I like it even less when people try to impose absurd post-medieval values on other people and use scripture to do it. And it's hardly beside the point to ask why they do it. Christ freed us from the curse that set man above woman. What right has anyone to bring the curse back? And how dare they use scripture to do so?

Good lord... It's kind of annoying when you act like a crime is being committed against humanity and it's up to you to stop it.

Just read this article.
Leadership in the Home - A Defense | Challies Dot Com

Also, if Christ freed us from the curse that set man above woman (which is not a curse at all as the same principle is applied to male headship in the home and church body), why wasn't the curse that makes childbirth so laborsome and painful also done away with?

 

[MacFall]

1 Timothy 2:12-15 12 But I do not allow

Paul does not allow. Is Paul God?

it is referring to an authority that Adam was granted over Eve

Do not confuse power and authority. God never gave man authority over woman. God enumerated the effects of the curse of sin, whereby man would exercise power over woman.

Man then uses that enumeration as an excuse to rule over woman. Does anyone else see the irony here?

Either we are freed from the curse, man and woman alike, or we are not. If we are all still under the curse, then what, exactly, did Christ's sacrifice accomplish? But on what basis do we assume that man is freed from it, while woman is not?

But the only remaining option is that man has no right to rule woman; and if he claims to follow Christ, then he has no excuse, either.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says.

Do you believe that women should actually be silent in church? That it is sinful for them to say anything at all? If yes, then kudos to you for being consistent, although I would disagree. But if not, then you completely undercut your own argument with your inconsistency. You can't use Paul as a lawgiver sometimes, but not in others.

Ephesians 5:22-23 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 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.

So the man should act like Christ, THE ULTIMATE SERVANT, and the woman should respond in kind.

Thank you for proving my point for me.

Christianity is about mutual service. Anything else is a perversion of the Gospel.

 

[Spunkn]

Should have listened to Amberly, my apologies to everyone else in this thread for derailing it.

 

[MacFall]

if Christ freed us from the curse that set man above woman (which is not a curse at all as the same principle is applied to male headship in the home and church body)

Man's headship is the headship of Christ. Christ's headship is that of perfect, humble service. That was a total and deliberate repudiation by Paul of prior cultural ideas of man's role in the household.

why wasn't the curse that makes childbirth so laborsome and painful also done away with?

Because that is a physical effect of sin rather than a spiritual one. Even Christ had to suffer physical death.

Nevertheless, the "thorns and thistles" of the world have been gradually alleviated, in no small part due to the work of the Church in advancing the sciences of medicine and agriculture. Since the establishment of Christ's Church we have seen the beginnings of the redemption of Creation, though we will not see it completely fulfilled until it is brought to an end.

It's kind of annoying when you act like a crime is being committed against humanity and it's up to you to stop it.

A crime is being committed and it is up to us, as in the Church as a whole, to stop it. Yet certain elements of the Church not only fail to do so, but openly oppose all attempts to do so.

 

[Paulie079]

Should have listened to Amberly, my apologies to everyone else in this thread for derailing it.

Anyway, he's using bold, so he must be right

 

[MacFall]

Should have listened to Amberly, my apologies to everyone else in this thread for derailing it.

Your refusal to defend your position suits your position well.

 

[Paulie079]

Your refusal to defend your position suits your position well.

I think his silence says more about his character than his position.

 

[jess9450]

Fine. But if people want the conversation about it to stop, then I will.

1 Timothy 2:12-15 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15 But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.

I dont think this verse is saying woman can't say anything, but it is referring to an authority that Adam was granted over Eve, and that men are given over women.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 34 The women are to keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church.

My purpose here, is not to bash women. Far from it. Nor to say what they can and cannot do. My only purpose in showing these verses is to show that there is some authority man is given over women. Why would women be told to go and ask their husbands at home if the husband was not the authority in such things?

Ephesians 5:22-23 Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 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.

As the above verse says, it's a picture of Christ as the head of the church. Doesn't mean we're "better" than women or anything.

Hmm yeeeah, I take real issue with the whole "women should keep silent in church" thing. I honestly believe that was a statement that was culturally relevant at the time Paul was writing, rather than something that all Christians need to apply to their faith today. I understand that God has created men and women differently for a reason, and both have their own roles to play, but I'm not of the belief that women are to be completely submissive and subservient to their husbands - to put it simply, a marriage should be a partnership with both husbands and wives giving and taking in the relationship.

Anywho, for those men who would like women to show interest so that you'll ask them out, what kinds of tips (flirting or otherwise) could you share with us?

 

[MacFall]

Well said, jess. According to the model given to us by Christ, leadership and submission are exactly the same thing. That's the whole point: leadership by example, and mutual submission. And that is where any attempt to provide moral backing for culturally-founded gender roles hits a wall and breaks into pieces.

 

[Paulie079]

Hmm yeeeah, I take real issue with the whole "women should keep silent in church" thing. I honestly believe that was a statement that was culturally relevant at the time Paul was writing, rather than something that all Christians need to apply to their faith today. I understand that God has created men and women differently for a reason, and both have their own roles to play, but I'm not of the belief that women are to be completely submissive and subservient to their husbands - to put it simply, a marriage should be a partnership with both husbands and wives giving and taking in the relationship.

I agree with the idea that "a marriage should be a partnership with both husbands and wives giving and taking in the relationship," however, submission on the part of the wife goes right along with that. Also, you really have to be aware of what your definition of submission is.

Biblical submission is not:
-Being quiet
-Withholding opinions
-Mindlessly following and obeying
-Tirelessly serving
-Applicable to non-Christians

Biblical submission is:
-Trusting
-Following leadership
-Applicable only to believers

And just to provide the other side of things...

Biblical headship/leadership is not:
-Domineering/over-powering
-Self-serving
-Beligerent
-Lazy
-Passive

Biblical headship/leadership is:
-Servanthood
-Selfless
-Responsible
-Caring and gentle
-Courageous
-Christ-centered

Two things are incredibly important here:
1. This applies in a Christian context. Women have no reason to follow the leadership of men who are not truly Christ-following Christians. Does this mean that non-Christian men can't be good husbands? No. But it does mean that their leadership is lacking, even if it's good.
2. It is absolutely not the job of the man to play Holy Spirit and make sure the wife is fulfilling her role as wife. And it is absolutely not the job of the woman to play Holy Spirit and make sure the husband is fulfilling his role as husband. Is it okay to approach them and challenge them to be better? Not at all. But the man should be always mainly concerned about loving and serving his wife while the woman should be always mainly concerned about loving and serving her husband. (And how they love and serve the other will look different because *spoiler alert* men and women are different. )

I've gotten used to saying the same things over and again and really trying to be crystal clear about this because so many people have messed this up and have conveyed a wrong understanding of the roles of men and women. A lot of people will be really skeptical about it, but when the husband and w