Posted on 06/04/2016 11:38:48 AM PDT by Jim W N
I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. But every woman that prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. I Corinthians 11:3-9.
This is nothing new. It's actually 6000 years old. As Satan deceived Eve in the garden and Adam went along with it, so now, in a society that has turned from trusting God, Satan has again deceived women and men are going along for the ride to the destruction of society and infanticide of the unborn.
So.. relatively new then?
Relative, I guess so. But 6000 years of the same thing isn’t what you’d call a “new” idea.
Yes.
Men’s movement too.
I see all sorts of whining cry babies, including here, who couldn’t keep their wife and blame everything but their own selves.
< a href="http://FReep" target="_blank" >Lover of Liberty ^< /a >
?????
This is a “Personal Blog” post my FRiend. Again, you need to look before you leap.
There are arguments about whether women should be wearing hats “in church” today. I would posit the principle of respect is more important than how it is implemented in practice. Cultural expressions of gender specific conduct differ from society to society. This looks like a situation where women already were expected by society to wear hats and so for women to go without would be a noticeable breach of etiquette and risk causing offense. We might not need to do that today — a congregation may choose to be permissive about it — because the customs of showing gender specific respect are implemented differently, but again that society would know nothing of our modern “bathroom furors” either, not having the blessing of indoor plumbing.
The guiding practice should be love as God has intended and desired it to be carried out.
Maybe I should have left that part out because it is missing the real point here. The point is God made man to be the head of the women, something popular cultural and PC utterly despises.
This Scripture has context, for which the application is behavior of men and women when the members of a local church are assembled for religious functions. Christian women do not owe obeisance to men in general in the secular environment, IMHO.
Maybe I should have left the etiquette part out because it is missing the real point here. The point is God made man to be the head of the women, something popular cultural and PC utterly despises.
There are arguments about whether 6000 is literal or symbolic. 6000 is a Jewish tradition, and Judaism was the cradle of Christianity. Actually the count in Jewish tradition is not yet quite 6000 — 6000 is the point at which the world is supposed to end. It was deduced by numerical mysticism from the presence of six “aleph” characters in the first verse of Genesis in the original Hebrew — aleph also being a term that means thousand.
I go pretty much whole hog old-earth creationist here. The Einsteinian theory of relativity will yield the scientific rationale for any time dilatation that is needed. Translated: what it looked like in God’s time frame depends on how fast God moved, and approaching or exceeding warp speed is no problem for an omnipotent Deity.
I’d like to know what the Indians were thinking 13,000 years ago.
Dot or feather?
It is part of the mistaken idea that mankind has to establish itself apart from God, or at best through making use of a relationship with God when it is convenient.
The honor that women get in this scenario is not a lesser honor, it is a different kind of honor. Men are not appointed to gestate babies or (usually) be the more nurturing influence in a family. Many of the attributes of God as expressed in biblical Hebrew appear in the feminine gender. I asked a rabbi once (though I am Christian now) why we never called God, “she” — and he was wise enough to remember this fact. When referring to the Creator, though when push comes to shove we call the Creator “He” — we see something that transcends the human idea of gender. Gender was needed because one sex was too limited a thing to be able to express the character of God. Imagine trying to do a piano and violin duet into which the composer poured his heart and soul, with only the piano, or only the violin.
To quote a famous fictional Greek wife
Yes but the woman is the neck
I think this means feather.
However I don’t think this is a big deal.
You know the old joke about the physicist who tried to get out of a ticket for running a red light, who said that because of spectrum shift, the light looked green as he approached. But the prosecutor knew physics too, and asked the physicist to calculate his speed, whereupon he was convicted of speeding.
God knows how to work all these details together into a beautiful whole, but we need to respect His ways of doing it. We aren’t deity — thank goodness, because if we were, we would muff it.
The Mormons make a point that God came to the Indian as well. I think God comes to all men in some way.
However, the information is probably forever lost. But, it would make for great archaeology, should anyone find a vector from a completely different culture that crosses Christianity or Judaism.
We need to be careful about what anthropologists deduce from limited evidence. There are not many, if any, stable matriarchal societies. Sin is one of the things that has made it necessary for the male gender to be at the fore as a norm. Eve, having fallen, mis-nurtured Adam right into a disaster.
As Tommy Sotomayor has pointed out many times, anyone can see what a matriarchal society looks like by driving down your local MLK boulevard.
And the bible wouldn’t dispute that God makes a witness to humanity through nature, enough that “they have no excuse.” They have every reason to know there is something greater and that it needs to be called out to for help.
The gospel doesn’t tell people anything new as much as to remind them of something old that they chose to forget.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.