Women will be saved through Childbearing, if
- Thread starter JohnR7
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The Lord had to raise up women during this time:
1Again the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the Lord, now that Ehud was dead. 2So the Lord sold them into the hands of Jabin king of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor. Sisera, the commander of his army, was based in Harosheth Haggoyim. 3Because he had nine hundred chariots fitted with iron and had cruelly oppressed the Israelites for twenty years, they cried to the Lord for help.
4Now Deborah, a prophet, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading a Israel at that time. 5She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites went up to her to have their disputes decided. 6She sent for Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, “The Lord, the God of Israel, commands you: ‘Go, take with you ten thousand men of Naphtali and Zebulun and lead them up to Mount Tabor. 7I (the Lord) will lead Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his troops to the Kishon River and give him into your hands.’ ”
8Barak said to her (Deborah), “If you go with me, I will go; but if you don’t go with me, I won’t go.”
9“Certainly I will go with you,” said Deborah. “But because of the course you are taking, the honor will not be yours, for the Lord will deliver Sisera into the hands of a woman.”
21 ...Heber’s wife (Jael), picked up a tent peg and a hammer and went quietly to him (Sisera) while he lay fast asleep, exhausted. She drove the peg through his temple into the ground, and he died.
Judges 4
As I said before, something's not right when women (or children) are in charge of God's people. Something's wrong if women are doing what men are supposed to be doing.
4“I will make mere youths their officials;
children will rule over them.”
12 Youths oppress my people,
women rule over them.
My people, your guides lead you astray;
they turn you from the path."
Isaiah 3:4, 12
See it?
If women ruling the people of God, and assuming the duties that men perform, is not a bad thing, why does the Prophet point it out as a bad thing? And why does it matter that honor go to a woman rather than to a man for the death of Sisera the enemy of Israel?
1Again the Israelites did evil in the eyes of the Lord, now that Ehud was dead. 2So the Lord sold them into the hands of Jabin king of Canaan, who reigned in Hazor. Sisera, the commander of his army, was based in Harosheth Haggoyim. 3Because he had nine hundred chariots fitted with iron and had cruelly oppressed the Israelites for twenty years, they cried to the Lord for help.
4Now Deborah, a prophet, the wife of Lappidoth, was leading a Israel at that time. 5She held court under the Palm of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in the hill country of Ephraim, and the Israelites went up to her to have their disputes decided. 6She sent for Barak son of Abinoam from Kedesh in Naphtali and said to him, “The Lord, the God of Israel, commands you: ‘Go, take with you ten thousand men of Naphtali and Zebulun and lead them up to Mount Tabor. 7I (the Lord) will lead Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his troops to the Kishon River and give him into your hands.’ ”
8Barak said to her (Deborah), “If you go with me, I will go; but if you don’t go with me, I won’t go.”
9“Certainly I will go with you,” said Deborah. “But because of the course you are taking, the honor will not be yours, for the Lord will deliver Sisera into the hands of a woman.”
21 ...Heber’s wife (Jael), picked up a tent peg and a hammer and went quietly to him (Sisera) while he lay fast asleep, exhausted. She drove the peg through his temple into the ground, and he died.
Judges 4
As I said before, something's not right when women (or children) are in charge of God's people. Something's wrong if women are doing what men are supposed to be doing.
4“I will make mere youths their officials;
children will rule over them.”
12 Youths oppress my people,
women rule over them.
My people, your guides lead you astray;
they turn you from the path."
Isaiah 3:4, 12
See it?
If women ruling the people of God, and assuming the duties that men perform, is not a bad thing, why does the Prophet point it out as a bad thing? And why does it matter that honor go to a woman rather than to a man for the death of Sisera the enemy of Israel?
As I pointed out, it is to our shame when women (and/or children) rule over us in the congregation of God's people. If it wasn't, and it was just a normal thing that God did the prophet would have had no reason to say what he did about women ruling over Israel, and no reason for Judges to point out that a woman would get the honor instead of a man in the deliverance of Israel from Sisera the commander of Jabin's army.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
T
It seems to me when men fail, women had to fulfill the role. Similarly, when Moses could not circumcise his son, God was upset and wanted to kill Moses. However, Moses' wife quickly circumcised their son to prevent this. During those times, circumcision was a big deal and men were responsible for this role.
Nowadays, there is a lack of people volunteering for responsibility and leadership positions at church. Church attendance is decreasing. People are not rushing to volunteer, and there is a big need for people who are committed to the church. For example, at my church, the tellers/people who count the offerings are mostly women. As a result, a lot of the church finance team such as Treasurer come through the ranks of tellers and so consist of women.
Such can the case in modern times when women are called to be pastors/leaders in church. I am sure women pastors are prayerful and feel led by God to be pastors.
Nowadays, there is a lack of people volunteering for responsibility and leadership positions at church. Church attendance is decreasing. People are not rushing to volunteer, and there is a big need for people who are committed to the church. For example, at my church, the tellers/people who count the offerings are mostly women. As a result, a lot of the church finance team such as Treasurer come through the ranks of tellers and so consist of women.
Such can the case in modern times when women are called to be pastors/leaders in church. I am sure women pastors are prayerful and feel led by God to be pastors.
-
4
- Show all
You're right the Bible shows us that Paul told those in the churches he founded and managed through his epistles to them, (epistles=letters), that he did not permit women to have authority over men.
Note the first person narrative here as Paul used the singular nominative personal pronoun, "I".
1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man ...
While in Paul's other letters we find him saying this to the church at Philippi, the first European church founded by the Apostle.
The Epistle of Philippians chapter 4:1Therefore, my brothers, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm thus in the Lord, my beloved.
Exhortation, Encouragement, and Prayer
2 I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche to agree in the Lord. 3 Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored[c] side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.
Footnote: [c]Or strived (see 1:27)
The Epistle to the Romans chapter 16:1 has Paul mentioning Phoebe, who was a Diaconos, a Deacon, of the church of Cenchrea. She carried Paul's epistles from Greece to the Romans and by sea. Paul praised her work at the church.
And when Paul speaks at length about the spiritual gifts given to the church he does not discriminate and state those were given unto men alone. Nor does he say some gifts were for men and others for women only. Instead these were for all the church.
The Epistle to the Romans chapter 12:6 Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; 7 if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching; 8 the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads,[f] with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.
The Epistle of 1st Corinthians chapter 12
Spiritual Gifts
The Epistle of the Ephesians chapter 4
Unity in the Body of Christ
The Epistle of the Galatians chapter 3
28.There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Article:
Did Paul Really Say That About Women?
"....
How do we reconcile all of this with Paul's oft-quoted words about women being silent and not teaching men? The same way we deal with other passages that obviously were meant for specific times and cultures. Five times the New Testament says, “Greet one another with a holy kiss.” Do we follow that? Paul tells Timothy to “drink a little wine for the sake of your stomach.” Does that mean wine is the “biblical cure” for all stomach ailments?
Most of Paul's letters are written to address specific problems. That may account for that one verse about “women being silent.” The main thing to remember is that in I Cor. 11 (same letter!) Paul told women HOW they were to pray and prophesy in public meetings: with heads covered. He did not say they should NOT pray and prophesy!
The letter to Timothy was a personal letter dealing with problems that Timothy knew well, and so did Paul, but we do not! We know that Ephesus, where Timothy lived, was a den of iniquity. Paul mentions in the first chapter the endless myths and genealogies that consumed the people. False teaching abounded. Perhaps some of it was by women. Timothy knew that Priscilla and Aquila, who had now come to help him, had taught in Ephesus earlier and Timothy surely would not think of keeping her from teaching now!
Sound Bible interpretation requires us to interpret the “unclear” passages in the light of the clear ones. Paul showed by his life practices and his teaching that women were to use their God-given gifts for the benefit of the church of Christ. Paul was a devout follower of Jesus, whose dealings with women indicated that they could teach and lead in whatever way God led them.
The church has suffered through the centuries by discouraging and disqualifying half its members, many of whom have been called by the Spirit to serve. A healthy church needs every member and the gifts they bring.
Let us build the church--not in our own image, but in the image of him who died to save us. "
Note the first person narrative here as Paul used the singular nominative personal pronoun, "I".
1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man ...
While in Paul's other letters we find him saying this to the church at Philippi, the first European church founded by the Apostle.
The Epistle of Philippians chapter 4:1Therefore, my brothers, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm thus in the Lord, my beloved.
Exhortation, Encouragement, and Prayer
2 I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche to agree in the Lord. 3 Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored[c] side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life.
Footnote: [c]Or strived (see 1:27)
The Epistle to the Romans chapter 16:1 has Paul mentioning Phoebe, who was a Diaconos, a Deacon, of the church of Cenchrea. She carried Paul's epistles from Greece to the Romans and by sea. Paul praised her work at the church.
And when Paul speaks at length about the spiritual gifts given to the church he does not discriminate and state those were given unto men alone. Nor does he say some gifts were for men and others for women only. Instead these were for all the church.
The Epistle to the Romans chapter 12:6 Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; 7 if service, in our serving; the one who teaches, in his teaching; 8 the one who exhorts, in his exhortation; the one who contributes, in generosity; the one who leads,[f] with zeal; the one who does acts of mercy, with cheerfulness.
The Epistle of 1st Corinthians chapter 12
Spiritual Gifts
The Epistle of the Ephesians chapter 4
Unity in the Body of Christ
The Epistle of the Galatians chapter 3
28.There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Article:
Did Paul Really Say That About Women?
"....
How do we reconcile all of this with Paul's oft-quoted words about women being silent and not teaching men? The same way we deal with other passages that obviously were meant for specific times and cultures. Five times the New Testament says, “Greet one another with a holy kiss.” Do we follow that? Paul tells Timothy to “drink a little wine for the sake of your stomach.” Does that mean wine is the “biblical cure” for all stomach ailments?
Most of Paul's letters are written to address specific problems. That may account for that one verse about “women being silent.” The main thing to remember is that in I Cor. 11 (same letter!) Paul told women HOW they were to pray and prophesy in public meetings: with heads covered. He did not say they should NOT pray and prophesy!
The letter to Timothy was a personal letter dealing with problems that Timothy knew well, and so did Paul, but we do not! We know that Ephesus, where Timothy lived, was a den of iniquity. Paul mentions in the first chapter the endless myths and genealogies that consumed the people. False teaching abounded. Perhaps some of it was by women. Timothy knew that Priscilla and Aquila, who had now come to help him, had taught in Ephesus earlier and Timothy surely would not think of keeping her from teaching now!
Sound Bible interpretation requires us to interpret the “unclear” passages in the light of the clear ones. Paul showed by his life practices and his teaching that women were to use their God-given gifts for the benefit of the church of Christ. Paul was a devout follower of Jesus, whose dealings with women indicated that they could teach and lead in whatever way God led them.
The church has suffered through the centuries by discouraging and disqualifying half its members, many of whom have been called by the Spirit to serve. A healthy church needs every member and the gifts they bring.
Let us build the church--not in our own image, but in the image of him who died to save us. "
-
3
- Show all
and your opinion is that he's wrong?
your opinion is that the epistle to Timothy is false?
so it's not that you think the truth is 'different' now; you think the NT has been wrong all along? that Paul led the church at Corinth astray? that he gave them false teaching? that would mean all of Christendom has been wrong, up until now, now that you're here to fix it, wouldn't it?
your opinion is that the epistle to Timothy is false?
so it's not that you think the truth is 'different' now; you think the NT has been wrong all along? that Paul led the church at Corinth astray? that he gave them false teaching? that would mean all of Christendom has been wrong, up until now, now that you're here to fix it, wouldn't it?
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Your point about 1 Corinthians 14:34-36 was based on a misreading of what I had said, on words that do not exist in that chapter, and on your interpretation of the meaning of 1 Timothy 2 (which I consider incorrect). Logically, your point is invalid on two if not all three of those bases. Exactly where is the misunderstanding you so confidently allege?
You have completely misconstrued this story. There is no reason at all given (good or bad) why Deborah, a woman, was judge instead of a man. She told Barak to lead the army in a campaign, but he balked and would not go without her. For that reason, he did not get the glory of killing Sisera. The problem is Barak's hesitation or perhaps cowardice, not the fact that a woman was in the position of authority.
The comments from Isaiah 3 must be parsed and considered in their context. Verse 4 is a prophecy of judgment on Judah, and mentions youths, not women, so it's irrelevant. Verse 12 describes an existing situation, not a coming judgment. The problem is that Judah was not ruled by women at that time; rather, Jotham (male) was acting as regent for his father Uzziah, a leper. There is no historical explanation given for the comment, "women rule over them" either in Kings or Chronicles, and little is said of Jotham that would justify such a comment. The latter part of chapter 3 gives a clue; the women of Judah were bound up in materialism and outward displays of beauty. In that sense, the women (who were clearly doing wrong) were steering the course of the nation by their selfish demands. If that is the case, then the problem still is not "women in authority" but wrongly-motivated women misusing their influence.
What usually gets overlooked in these discussions is the fact that, on the whole, the men in the OT did a horrible job of leadership. People decry the rare instances of female leaders, and ignore the rank corruption of nearly all male leaders. Good leadership is not a gender-based issue.
The comments from Isaiah 3 must be parsed and considered in their context. Verse 4 is a prophecy of judgment on Judah, and mentions youths, not women, so it's irrelevant. Verse 12 describes an existing situation, not a coming judgment. The problem is that Judah was not ruled by women at that time; rather, Jotham (male) was acting as regent for his father Uzziah, a leper. There is no historical explanation given for the comment, "women rule over them" either in Kings or Chronicles, and little is said of Jotham that would justify such a comment. The latter part of chapter 3 gives a clue; the women of Judah were bound up in materialism and outward displays of beauty. In that sense, the women (who were clearly doing wrong) were steering the course of the nation by their selfish demands. If that is the case, then the problem still is not "women in authority" but wrongly-motivated women misusing their influence.
What usually gets overlooked in these discussions is the fact that, on the whole, the men in the OT did a horrible job of leadership. People decry the rare instances of female leaders, and ignore the rank corruption of nearly all male leaders. Good leadership is not a gender-based issue.
-
1
- Show all
I am not sure that any would disagree with this. For example, a female missionary teaching male and female unbelievers. I think the issue is when men do not fail, and women want to take positions of authority that scripture speaks against.
But how is Zipporah performing a circumcision the same as a woman having authority over a man?
You post a great example that women have incredibly important roles, and Zipporah basically saved the life of Israel's greatest prophet by her quick thinking and action. Some say the bible is sexist because only men could be circumcised, but I think its important to note the bible never prohibited women from circumcising. The covenant was that all males had to be circumcised, and male pride might have excluded women from performing circumcisions, but this would have been a cultural prohibition rather than a scriptural one.
Gen 17:12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
So the command to circumcise all males was to Abraham and his descendants (both men and women), but the responsibility might have fallen to the man more often because it was rarer for females to be the head of a household. So for Zipporah to circumcise her son, she was fulfilling her responsibility, but not in breach of any commandment or even having authority over Moses.
As per the example above, if scripture doesn't prohibit these things and men can't fill the roles, I'm sure women are more than capable.
This is where I disagree, as God makes a specific statement in scripture that women should not have authority over men. So, unless we are talking about an exceptional case (e.g. no Christian men), I think women pastors is an unbiblical concept. But as for women tellers, counters, treasurers, etc. (even circumcisers!), I don't think there's any scriptural case against.
But how is Zipporah performing a circumcision the same as a woman having authority over a man?
You post a great example that women have incredibly important roles, and Zipporah basically saved the life of Israel's greatest prophet by her quick thinking and action. Some say the bible is sexist because only men could be circumcised, but I think its important to note the bible never prohibited women from circumcising. The covenant was that all males had to be circumcised, and male pride might have excluded women from performing circumcisions, but this would have been a cultural prohibition rather than a scriptural one.
Gen 17:12 And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.
So the command to circumcise all males was to Abraham and his descendants (both men and women), but the responsibility might have fallen to the man more often because it was rarer for females to be the head of a household. So for Zipporah to circumcise her son, she was fulfilling her responsibility, but not in breach of any commandment or even having authority over Moses.
As per the example above, if scripture doesn't prohibit these things and men can't fill the roles, I'm sure women are more than capable.
This is where I disagree, as God makes a specific statement in scripture that women should not have authority over men. So, unless we are talking about an exceptional case (e.g. no Christian men), I think women pastors is an unbiblical concept. But as for women tellers, counters, treasurers, etc. (even circumcisers!), I don't think there's any scriptural case against.
-
1
- Show all
that, as you know but don't care, would directly contradict 1 Timothy 2 -- how much of the NT do you reject?
how would they comprehend 'do not eat' if they had no concept of obedience?
your opinion that you are trying to teach is that God gave them a law they were 100% incapable of understanding, then punished them for disobeying it even though they hadn't even the first inkling of what obeying or disobeying even was? you don't think Adam or Woman even guessed there was a difference between doing what God said and not doing?
how stupid do you think this man was, who named every single animal and who walked with God in paradise and was the first type of Christ? how did God tell Adam, tend the garden, if Adam was too imbecilic & ignorant to even grok that God had given him an instruction?
if this was ultimately Adam's most grievous sin, why is it that God never chastised Adam for 'allowing Woman to eat of the tree' ?
perhaps because, as you teach, Adam had no capacity to understand what obedience would be or would consist of?
then how does God judge either one of them, if they're basically not accountable? you're portraying them as infants with no understanding at all.
if Woman 'had an excuse' of naivety are you saying God was unjust?
you teach that Adam was equally deceived - though the Bible teaches the opposite - so why in your opinion doesn't Adam have the same excuse?
you teach that they both had no concept whatsoever of obedience/disobedience -- which is complete naivety -- so
both Adam & Eve have what you call "an excuse" since neither had a clue whether they were being obedient or disobedient or even knew whether it was good to listen to God or not. you also teach that both were deceived. so how is it, in your opinion, that God is just to punish them?
so you're saying God was unjust to make Adam head over Woman?
let me see if i've got this straight, to sum up:
you say 1 Timothy is lies, Paul a false teacher.
you say Adam & Woman were pretty much retarded and didn't have any concept of right or wrong at all.
you say both Adam & Woman were deceived & witless victims.
you say God punished Woman's totally excusable ignorance and naivety by putting a worthless idiot man in charge of her. which, you say, is the same thing God did when He formed her out of the same man in the first place.
and you're a woman, supposing to teach us these things, correct?
do you think some modern feminist philosophies may possibly be coloring your opinion here?
how would they comprehend 'do not eat' if they had no concept of obedience?
your opinion that you are trying to teach is that God gave them a law they were 100% incapable of understanding, then punished them for disobeying it even though they hadn't even the first inkling of what obeying or disobeying even was? you don't think Adam or Woman even guessed there was a difference between doing what God said and not doing?
how stupid do you think this man was, who named every single animal and who walked with God in paradise and was the first type of Christ? how did God tell Adam, tend the garden, if Adam was too imbecilic & ignorant to even grok that God had given him an instruction?
if this was ultimately Adam's most grievous sin, why is it that God never chastised Adam for 'allowing Woman to eat of the tree' ?
perhaps because, as you teach, Adam had no capacity to understand what obedience would be or would consist of?
then how does God judge either one of them, if they're basically not accountable? you're portraying them as infants with no understanding at all.
if Woman 'had an excuse' of naivety are you saying God was unjust?
you teach that Adam was equally deceived - though the Bible teaches the opposite - so why in your opinion doesn't Adam have the same excuse?
you teach that they both had no concept whatsoever of obedience/disobedience -- which is complete naivety -- so
both Adam & Eve have what you call "an excuse" since neither had a clue whether they were being obedient or disobedient or even knew whether it was good to listen to God or not. you also teach that both were deceived. so how is it, in your opinion, that God is just to punish them?
so you're saying God was unjust to make Adam head over Woman?
let me see if i've got this straight, to sum up:
you say 1 Timothy is lies, Paul a false teacher.
you say Adam & Woman were pretty much retarded and didn't have any concept of right or wrong at all.
you say both Adam & Woman were deceived & witless victims.
you say God punished Woman's totally excusable ignorance and naivety by putting a worthless idiot man in charge of her. which, you say, is the same thing God did when He formed her out of the same man in the first place.
and you're a woman, supposing to teach us these things, correct?
do you think some modern feminist philosophies may possibly be coloring your opinion here?
-
2
- Show all
wow, you think i haven't read this?
why would it matter to you if i have or not, since you teach that it's all rubbish anyhow?
what was it you were saying about naivety earlier?
https://www.christianheadlines.com/...hristians-more-likely-to-commit-adultery.html
https://blackchristiannews.com/2018...ry-premarital-sex-porn-and-other-sexual-sins/
https://www.focusonthefamily.com/marriage/divorce-rate-in-the-church-as-high-as-the-world/
why would it matter to you if i have or not, since you teach that it's all rubbish anyhow?
And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle
— I am telling the truth, I am not lying —
and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles.
(1 Timothy 2:7)
when it is you who say Paul is not telling the truth, Paul is a false and unfaithful teacher, my dear, i rather think it is the validity of your 'points' about what's said in this little epistle that ought to be seen as questionable. how can someone who rejects it teach others about it? what was it you were saying about naivety earlier?
https://www.christianheadlines.com/...hristians-more-likely-to-commit-adultery.html
https://blackchristiannews.com/2018...ry-premarital-sex-porn-and-other-sexual-sins/
https://www.focusonthefamily.com/marriage/divorce-rate-in-the-church-as-high-as-the-world/
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Good morning Wispered, my interpretation of the verse in question and I agree with you about Paul speaking in the first person but closer to home, in plain english: I sufer not a woman to teach by seduction to bring me in bondage of dominnation and submittion.
Now I also have to admit that this is something I strugled with my whole life. I had an Idol of woman in my heart and many men do. The relationship I'm in now is the first healty relationship I'm in, quite the learning experience and still stumbling along espesially when I think am doing well: letting my guard down and sinking in fantasy of being dominated sexually. When I do, the obvious outcome is that it's no longer about a relationship with her but and Idol of woman and loosing sight of the Lord: the relationship becomes quarelsome. The Lord warned me many times and rescued us from break up 7 times that I'm aware of. We are miserable creatures in the flesh so that appart from the Holy Spirit we are not for real. "Without Love I am nothing."
Now I also have to admit that this is something I strugled with my whole life. I had an Idol of woman in my heart and many men do. The relationship I'm in now is the first healty relationship I'm in, quite the learning experience and still stumbling along espesially when I think am doing well: letting my guard down and sinking in fantasy of being dominated sexually. When I do, the obvious outcome is that it's no longer about a relationship with her but and Idol of woman and loosing sight of the Lord: the relationship becomes quarelsome. The Lord warned me many times and rescued us from break up 7 times that I'm aware of. We are miserable creatures in the flesh so that appart from the Holy Spirit we are not for real. "Without Love I am nothing."
-
1
- Show all
I have a simpler interpretation, the woman was deceived, but the man Loved the woman more than God and had to be exposed as a creation that could be shaken. God knew about the fall before it happened: before creating, and had to resolve to take the blame before creating. "The Lamb slain before the foundation of the world."
Also man being the head of His wife is aboult loving her as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for her." To take the blame for the relationship. Without learning this from the Lord by the Holy Spirit, I would not have a wife waiting for me...
Also man being the head of His wife is aboult loving her as Christ loved the Church and gave Himself for her." To take the blame for the relationship. Without learning this from the Lord by the Holy Spirit, I would not have a wife waiting for me...
-
1
- Show all
Are we rightly able to presume that? The Book of 2nd John tells us that the elect lady had children. Were she a widow I think we would read that there. Were this address to her attention alone, perhaps this is why her husband is not brought into it. The messaging is for her.
What is notable in the Book of 2nd John is interestingly enough that which puts to right the false teachings we may encounter today as pertains to our Lord. Those who say He was not divine, but a man imbued with special powers by God. Which is wholly, holy, false.
See here:
Walking in Truth and Love
4 I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we were commanded by the Father. 5 And now I ask you, dear lady—not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning—that we love one another. 6 And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it. 7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist.
What is notable in the Book of 2nd John is interestingly enough that which puts to right the false teachings we may encounter today as pertains to our Lord. Those who say He was not divine, but a man imbued with special powers by God. Which is wholly, holy, false.
See here:
Walking in Truth and Love
4 I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we were commanded by the Father. 5 And now I ask you, dear lady—not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning—that we love one another. 6 And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it. 7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist.
