 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 |
Link |
| Quiet Wyatt wrote: | Link,
I am a pastor.
Anyone who would even SUGGEST that wives ought to submit to abuse is simply an enabler of abuse, not to mention a complete idiot. I would GLADLY say this to your face too.
Some people are simply beyond help though. |
Well, that's your opinion. My belief is that it is useful to be able to examine all issues related to faith and morality and see how we arrive at our conclusions and be able to explain them based on Biblical principles. I do ask tough questions occasionally. If you want to despise your brother for asking questions, like these that's up to you.
There are also lots of forms of 'abuse' and the bar gets lowered all the time.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/7/11 11:27 am
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
| I despise those who physically abuse women and children and God does too. Enablers of abusers are even worse. Do NOT pray for my wife and baby. I want nothing to do with your kind. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
11/7/11 12:27 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
Wyatt,
You have no basis for judging me as an 'enabler'. I did ask some questions. Why don't we both go away and pray about this rather than having this conversation now? Agreed?
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/7/11 3:50 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Social Context? |
Mark Hardgrove |
Eph 6:5-8
5 Bondservants [slaves], be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ; 6 not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as bondservants [slaves] of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7 with goodwill doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men, 8 knowing that whatever good anyone does, he will receive the same from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free. NKJV
In the verse above Paul clearly tells slaves to obey their masters. In fact, he says they are to obey with “fear and trembling.” Many translations turn the word “slave”--from the Greek douloi--into the word “bondservant.” A quick search of the Greek, however, reveals that the word douloi means, “slaves.”
What does this have to do with the topic of this thread? The fact is that few people would take the verses above from Ephesians to argue in favor of slavery--though some did use this verse to justify slavery in the past. We understand that we live in a different culture and that when Paul spoke into the cultural context of the first century, his words (followed by strong Christian admonitions to the masters) was actually a push in the direction of recognizing the inherent dignity of all humans as children of God.
All of Paul’s comments regarding the role of women were written within a cultural context. To ignore this is to try to apply first century social ethos into the twenty-first century. Of course Paul would say that elders are to be the husband of one wife. He was not addressing the issue of whether or not woman should lead a church, in that culture they probably would not so the point would be moot. In fact, he was addressing the issue of multiple marriages, divorce, and/or multiple wives. It is strange that we will take a text that has more to do with men having multiple marriages and their fitness to lead, and using that text to try to exclude women from leadership.
While there are timeless truths in the Bible that transcend culture and social ethos, I think the role of women is one that needs to be accommodated by cultural context as much as we are willing to apply that hermeneutical standard to the practice of slavery.
I know, some are fearful that that this will lead to gays in ministry, but that is an apples and oranges argument. Homosexuality is clearly and repeatedly spoken to in Scripture as a moral issue, not a social issue. Nowhere does the Bible say that it is a sin to be woman, but the practice of homosexuality is and will continue to be a sin in the eyes of God and His Word.
_________________
Mark E. Hardgrove, D.Min., Ph.D.
Senior Pastor Conyers Church of God
http://www.conyerscog.org
Dean & VP for Academics at BHU
http://www.beulah.org/ |
Acts-celerater
Posts: 854
11/8/11 9:11 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Social Context? |
Link |
| Mark Hardgrove wrote: | Eph 6:5-8
5 Bondservants [slaves], be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in sincerity of heart, as to Christ; 6 not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but as bondservants [slaves] of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart, 7 with goodwill doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men, 8 knowing that whatever good anyone does, he will receive the same from the Lord, whether he is a slave or free. NKJV
In the verse above Paul clearly tells slaves to obey their masters. In fact, he says they are to obey with “fear and trembling.” Many translations turn the word “slave”--from the Greek douloi--into the word “bondservant.” A quick search of the Greek, however, reveals that the word douloi means, “slaves.”
What does this have to do with the topic of this thread? The fact is that few people would take the verses above from Ephesians to argue in favor of slavery--though some did use this verse to justify slavery in the past. We understand that we live in a different culture and that when Paul spoke into the cultural context of the first century, his words (followed by strong Christian admonitions to the masters) was actually a push in the direction of recognizing the inherent dignity of all humans as children of God. |
I am happy that we live in a world pretty much without legal slavery (almost without leagal slavery, with limited exceptions in the military, prisons, etc. in some countries). But I think we face a great danger when we try to impose our moral system on the Bible and read it into the Bible. God had plenty of opportunities to outlaw slavery when he radically altered Israel's concept of law with the Torah. Christianity was such a big change for people. He could have added in not owning slaves. Philemon was apparently a godly man based on Paul's salutation, and yet he was a slave owner. Their system of slavery wasn't the racial slavery system of the US. What I see is that at the very least slavery is within the realm of things God will allow in a society. the Bible does not condemn slavery and call it sinful. Slavery between Israelites, however, among brethren, was a seven year work contract, not a life of survitute unless that were chosen.
We can't assume that God's real system of morality is the American political philosophy, and that He was holding back in scripture because society was not ready. That seems to be the assumption of feminists and gay rights people who try to read their ideas into scripture. It even effects good old boy conservative Christians. It's easy for all of us to do this.
| Quote: |
All of Paul’s comments regarding the role of women were written within a cultural context. To ignore this is to try to apply first century social ethos into the twenty-first century. Of course Paul would say that elders are to be the husband of one wife. He was not addressing the issue of whether or not woman should lead a church, in that culture they probably would not so the point would be moot. In fact, he was addressing the issue of multiple marriages, divorce, and/or multiple wives. It is strange that we will take a text that has more to do with men having multiple marriages and their fitness to lead, and using that text to try to exclude women from leadership. |
Some feminists will read the Bible and try to do away with male headship in the marriage based on the idea that this was just something for that time period. Paul connects it to creation, not local culture. The Lord could have had the apostles to teach pure gender egalitarianism and nothing else. But he didn't.
Is the structure of the home related to the church? I see a connection. First a man, the husband of one wife, who leads his wife as head, submitted to Christ as head, rules his household well. Then, if he is faithful in this and various areas of ruling himself, he may be given responsibility to lead in the household of faith. The first stepping stone is leadership in the home before leadership in the household of faith.
That doesn't fit well with the career-track view of the ministry where you go to school for it and can get a job after you graduate. It is not completely irreconcilable with the 'call' view of the ministry.
| Quote: |
While there are timeless truths in the Bible that transcend culture and social ethos, I think the role of women is one that needs to be accommodated by cultural context as much as we are willing to apply that hermeneutical standard to the practice of slavery. |
I think we need to realize that slavery is among the realm of things God allows for in a society without condemning that society. I don't see where it is required-- except in our relationship to God-- for a society to be acceptable, but it is not forbidden.
| Quote: |
I know, some are fearful that that this will lead to gays in ministry, but that is an apples and oranges argument. Homosexuality is clearly and repeatedly spoken to in Scripture as a moral issue, not a social issue. Nowhere does the Bible say that it is a sin to be woman, but the practice of homosexuality is and will continue to be a sin in the eyes of God and His Word. |
I can see your point. Being a woman is not sinful. But is women not accepting their role sinful? If men do not accept their role in sexuality (either celibate or married) then that leads to sin.
The people in favor of saying homosexual behavior is not sinful will make similar arguments. The way it was practiced in their culture, homosexuality was sinful, they will say. But they say this doesn't hold in our day and time. And some of them will even go so far as to say that the Spirit is leading their churches to that direction. Some people at my church came from a UCC background. The United Churches of Christ are kind of conservative around here, but they know the thinking and the arguments in the other regions. This is the type of thinking they hear.
Do we need to take cultural context into account? Sure. But we need to be careful how we treat our knowledge of cultural context.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/8/11 2:34 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Opening correction for Link |
Mark Hardgrove |
Paul is writing to a predominately Gentile audience in Ephesus (see 2:11, and also 3:1; cf. 4:17), so I'm not sure your reference to Jewish law is applicable here. His statements are made in the context of Roman slavery, not Jewish.
_________________
Mark E. Hardgrove, D.Min., Ph.D.
Senior Pastor Conyers Church of God
http://www.conyerscog.org
Dean & VP for Academics at BHU
http://www.beulah.org/ |
Acts-celerater
Posts: 854
11/8/11 3:14 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| Mark Hardgrove wrote: | | Paul is writing to a predominately Gentile audience in Ephesus (see 2:11, and also 3:1; cf. 4:17), so I'm not sure your reference to Jewish law is applicable here. His statements are made in the context of Roman slavery, not Jewish. |
True that there was a difference between the two, but I was expanding on my comments about God allowing and regulating slavery in the Torah. Both societies had slavery. There were variations of it. God put a limit of 7 years on slavery between Hebrews under the Law of Moses.
Some people believe that the US ending slavery during and in the aftermath of the Civil War was a response to the prayers of Christian slaves in the US. That doesn't sound all that unlikely to me at all. But that doesn't mean slavery as an institution in society is intolerable or necessarily sinful before God. He allowed and regulated it in the Old Testament. He also regulated polygamy, but we have statements in the New Testament that have some bearing on that topic, while the New Testament tells slaves to submit to their masters. The New Testament doesn't say whether slavery is better or worse for society, but Paul did write to slaves, "If thou canst be free" use it rather.
Be that as it may, I am happy we live in a society that does not have the institution of slavery. I do think it is a poor approach to hermeneutics to assume that the American national philosophy is God's standard of righteousness, assume that God was holding out on revealed morality in scripture, interpret scripture through our philosophy, and then use our though process on this issue as an argument for tossing out other Biblical principles.
_________________
Link
Last edited by Link on 11/8/11 3:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/8/11 3:40 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Opening correction for Link |
Poimen |
| Link wrote: | | Mark Hardgrove wrote: | | Paul is writing to a predominately Gentile audience in Ephesus (see 2:11, and also 3:1; cf. 4:17), so I'm not sure your reference to Jewish law is applicable here. His statements are made in the context of Roman slavery, not Jewish. |
True that there was a difference between the two, but I was expanding on my comments about God allowing and regulating slavery in the Torah. Both societies had slavery. There were variations of it. God put a limit of 7 years on slavery between Hebrews under the Law of Moses.
Some people believe that the US ending slavery during and in the aftermath of the Civil War was a response to the prayers of Christian slaves in the US. That doesn't sound all that unlikely to me at all. But that doesn't mean slavery as an institution in society is intolerable or necessarily sinful before God. He allowed and regulated it in the Old Testament. He also regulated polygamy, but we have statements in the New Testament that have some bearing on that topic, while the New Testament tells slaves to submit to their masters. The New Testament doesn't say whether slavery is better or worse for society, but Paul did write to slaves, "If thou canst be free" use it rather.
Be that as it may, I am happy we live in a society that does not have the institution of slavery. I do think it is a poor approach to hermeneutics to assume that the American national philosophy is God's standard of righteousness, assume that God was holding out on revealed morality in scripture, interpret scripture through our philosophy, and then use our though process on this issue as an argument for tossing out other Biblical principles. |
Well stated and argued friend.
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher
Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay." |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
11/8/11 3:42 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Wow |
Mark Hardgrove |
I don't even know how to respond except to say "Get thee to a nunnery."
_________________
Mark E. Hardgrove, D.Min., Ph.D.
Senior Pastor Conyers Church of God
http://www.conyerscog.org
Dean & VP for Academics at BHU
http://www.beulah.org/ |
Acts-celerater
Posts: 854
11/8/11 5:22 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Wow |
Link |
| Mark Hardgrove wrote: | | I don't even know how to respond except to say "Get thee to a nunnery." |
I am familiar with the reference, but I don't know what you mean by it. Are you saying to 'go be a ho' or that you find the conversation maddening?
This kind of reminds me of this quote,
"Shaka, when the walls fell down."
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
11/8/11 6:29 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
