 Posted Tuesday, June 27, 2006 4:38 PM
|
|
|
|
Christian man:
I cannot express strongly enough how worried I am about your view of my credibility. This forum is mainly for ex-Christian Scientists but, as Linda has written here many times. all are welcome. I am an ex-Christian Scientist and have read this board for a very long time and am interested in how differently Christians view their religion and the Christiran Bible. (1) I wanted to express my gratitude for Linda's break down of your remarks and how she 'defends' this particular part of the Scriptures, and (2) Your comment "...admitting as a man...blah, blah..." needed particular emphasis to expose your attitude about women and how laughable it is that you've set yourself up to deliver us from male domination. BTW, are you an ex-Christian Scientist? Or know anything about this religion (or cult as many call it)?
Also Curious
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, June 27, 2006 9:28 PM
|
|
|
|
do you go further, and feel that all women should submit?
I think that God's desire is for Christian marriages to be an illustration of the relationship between Christ and his church. That illustration is clearly laid out in Epbesians 5:22-33 as I pointed out earlier in this thread. After giving instructions to wives and husbands, this passage clearly uses the marriage analogy to describe the relationship between Christ and his church:
"'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church." (v. 31-32)
From a secular standpoint, I think that some women are "more qualified" and "more willing" to lead the family than are their husbands. Like a number of other issues that don't involve core doctrine, I personally don't care whether husbands or wives run their individual families. So I am not having this discussion in order to tell you what I personally think.
My point is that the Bible has laid down a pattern for marriage and that, since that pattern is carefully compared to the relationship between Christ and his church, it is an enduring pattern that transcends cultural trends. God's pattern is always better, whether or not we choose to follow it.
A lot of people today feel that the Bible is flawed and should, therefore, be "interpreted" it to satisfy what seems to make sense at the moment. Using this approach, people are gutting much of what is sacred and precious about the Bible.
While I agree that some things written in the Bible clearly address cultural issues of that day, other things were meant for all time. Based on how it is presented, I think that God's plan for marriage is one of those "for all time" plans.
One more point -- The instructions regarding marriage were given to believers, so I think that they apply to believers rather than unbelievers. This makes sense in light of the analogy of Christ and his church. Christ does not have the intimate relationship with nonbelievers that he has with believers. And a nonbelieving man cannot understand the directive to "love your wives, just as Christ loved the church" when he doesn't understand how Christ loved the church.
So the bottom line is: I personally don't care who leads individual families, but I do care what the Bible says. I believe that the Bible is trustworthy and relevant, so I am not willing to "interpret it away" to meet my personal preferences.
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:12 AM
|
|
|
|
Also Curious,
Yes, I am a born & raised ex- CS. As far as my attitude about women that you keep referring to; I think it is evident how I feel about equality, and that I do not expect women to submit to their husbands. The comment you refer to was in jest, and only a fantasy. My wife is the leader of our household as my professional career won't allow me to. She also has a better ability than I. I feel that I am true to the teachings of the bible as I see it. I think you also agree with me that women should not have to submit to their husbands from one of your last posts.
Linda,
I read recently in a book, Progressive Christians admit that they interpret the bible, and Conservative Christians do not admit it, but in fact interpret just as much.
I think that your statement - While I agree that some things written in the Bible clearly address cultural issues of that day, other things were meant for all time. indicates that you do in fact interpret. You admit that you decide what is meant for all time, and what is a cultural issue of that day.
We just disagree on our interpretations of women submitting in marriage. You state - Based on how it is presented, I think that God's plan for marriage is one of those "for all time" plans. That is your interpretation. I believe that women submitting to their husbands is a cultural trend of that day, and not at all current with today's norms. In fact you admit that in every other part of life - workplace, etc. you fully support women taking the lead. But this was not accepted in Jesus' day either. So as culture has changed over the centuries, and women are now accepted as leaders, you accept them in every leadership role except in the household. I would say you are interpreting.
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. But whether you admit it or not, you are interpreting just as much as I am. We just interpret differently.
Christian man living in today's world
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, June 28, 2006 8:28 AM
|
|
|
|
Christian man living in today's world,
Progressive Christians admit that they interpret the bible, and Conservative Christians do not admit it, but in fact interpret just as much.
I admit I interpret as do my peers. The difference is that as I interpret, I seek to understand how to apply God's word to my circumstances. Others tend to seek how to apply their circumstances to God's word.
As in everything else I do, I am imperfect. I accept, however, that God knew what He was doing when He provided His word and do not believe He needs editorial assistance from me.
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, June 28, 2006 2:18 PM
|
|
|
|
Dear Christian Man Living in Todays World,
I agree with you wholeheartedly that we all interpret the Bible and cannot read it without putting our own "interpretation" on it. Makes perfect sense to me!
Avis
|
|
|
Posted Wednesday, June 28, 2006 9:38 PM
|
|
|
|
The difference is that as I interpret, I seek to understand how to apply God's word to my circumstances. Others tend to seek how to apply their circumstances to God's word.
You and I think alike, Do Go.
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, July 04, 2006 8:03 AM
|
|
|
|
You may find this Newsweek article interesting - God's Girls. For one thing, it mentions MBE as one of only two American women prior to Episcopal Church Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori to reach "the pinnacle of a religion's organizational chart".
Do Go Be Man
<><
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, July 04, 2006 8:57 AM
|
|
|
|
My father performed with Amy Semple McPherson during his performing years as an 'inspirational speaker' with the Chautauqua Circuit at the beginning of the last century through the 1920's. He said she was the most charismatic person who ever lived and learned much from her during those years. May be why he got into CS and learned to admire and trust the female gender.
Also Curious
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, July 04, 2006 10:27 AM
|
|
|
|
C-Span showed a Q/A meeting of a bunch of Progressive Party habitues talking about, what else? Equality and how to take over the Senate and House from the Republicans. One woman was an expert on the Wal-Mart case involving discrimination of wages between the men and women...doing the same jobs. She gave the example of testimony of one woman who asked her supervisor why she was getting a less hourly wage than her male counterparts and the supervisor said, "God made Adam first." Cute.
Also Curious
|
|
|
Posted Tuesday, July 04, 2006 11:34 AM
|
|
|
| | |