Col 3:18-21

Ok here we're seeing a relational topic being discussed. A big problem we have facing society today is the inability of people to get along with each other. We see that even here on JU. We have sibling rivalry, husband and wife issues, crimes, battles and wars and the root of the problem is all the same. We've gotten away from God and we have lost our way. We have no absolute moral or ethical standards to regulate behavior.

When a person comes to Christ our problems that lead to these relational problems cease to exist. The Word of God contains an absolute moral standard and the believer now has a purpose and an understanding of the nature of God that makes all else seem small and frivilous.

Christianity is personal and relational. We are to have an impact on society around us and that is Paul's theme here when he discusses the new man's (born again believers) relationship to those around hm. What Paul is teaching here is not new and something Christ touched on in the Sermon on the Mount. Christianity is not the religion of hermits, Priests or monks. We are not called out to withdraw from society but to be an influence for Christ thru their relationships. I used to say when I was raising my kids that I was raising them not to be influenced by society but for them to be men that would impact society. Sadly today many don't take this responsibility seriously although I could list you many great reforms in Western society related to Christianity (mostly of yesteryear sad to say) if you'd like.

In this section Paul mentions two basic principles, authority and submission and this is not unique to Christianity. God in the OT showed this was his plan for homes to operate on this basis. Here Paul provides brief instructions for Christians living in the home by discussing three relationships, husbands and wives, parents and children and masters and servants.

The words "submit" or "be subject to" some say reflect chauvinistic, rabbinic attitude toward women and they look to Paul as their example. There are several misconceptions about submission. It does not imply inferiority. Gal 3:28 (also written by Paul) clearly affirms that there is no diff between male and female spiritually. Jesus submitted to the Father during his time here on earth yet he was in no way inferior to Him. Submission is not obedience. Obedience in this passage is reserved for children and parents. The husband's authority is not to be exercised in an overbearing manner and is not to be forced. The wife submits of her own free will as Jesus did out of love for his father.

Many men love to quote this first verse about submission but neglect the very next verse which is says to love your wives. In Eph 5:25 it says to love your wives as Christ loved the church. The tense here is continuous action and is not speaking of passion or emotion but the love of choice....an agapate love which is a covenant kind of love.

God's design that a wife's submission operate within a context of love. A man who truly loves his wife would never force her to submit to something humiliating or degrading as he loves her as Christ loved the church.

I don't know of any women that would have a problem with this type of love. It's Satan who loves to twist scripture and make it seem out of fashion and out of touch for modern times.

Ah shoot KFC, I wish you wouldda let me have a minute to fix this....

Sodaiho if you can delete my comment to fix the formatting error that would be fine with me.

makes me want to go out and get the movie! But she's right. Love is action. Love is evidenced by doing for another submitting to another putting their needs above your own.

A perfect example is when she listed the things that point to this love like washing his clothes, and cooking for him. It may not necessarily be what she always wanted to do but does prove her love for him when she does such things.

Paul says this, and Paul says that, you pay more attention to Paul's words than to the words of Jesus, whom you claim is god incarnate. Why do you take the words of Paul over the words of Jesus, KFC? Could it be that Paul's words because they come from Paul's own self importance, appeal to your own sense of self importance? I'm thinking that yes, they do. And Paul knew this would happen. By the way the serpent in the Garden was not satan, if it were it would have said so.

Christ loved no church, or temple, but THE I AM itself. The church and temple are posessions of man not God.

It's a very sad ending movie but a great one over all.

Here's the link for others... the formatting was all messed up before so I yanked it.

WWW Link

Kvetching is like a guilt trip and pity party wrapped up in a masterful art called kvetching.

Hopefully that helps you to understand kvetching.

yes but we're all to be called to be humble and to be servants to one another so even the Jewish mothers should not be known as complainers.

Since you brought this up I remembered the days of Korah (Num 16:41-50) in which there was some major complaining going on and God didn't like it one bit. Paul said this looking back at that situation:

"Neither murmer ye as some of them also murmured and were destroyed of the destroyer." 1 Cor 10:10.

Then we have the example of Miriam (Moses sister) who complained against her brother and found herself white as snow.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not perfect in this area. In fact my husband quotes to me the verse you brought up when I get in my complaining mood. I think it's more of a female trait than a man trait and probably why you guys bring this up regarding the Jewish women......*looks around for the sharp arrows of the feminist movement.*

yes thanks AD. I didn't know this although I think I did hear the word before.

I'll try not to kvetch too much today.   

I'm thinking that your initials KFC, should be changed to KFP, "Kicking for Paul" and not "Kicking for Christ". Paul says it's okay to defend yourself and create war, Jesus says "love thy enemies" and "turn the other cheek". Paul says it's okay to be concerned about your life and feeding your body. Jesus gave you the parable of the "lilies of the fields". Your actions and your words speak in direct parallel to those of the "faithless servant" that Jesus spoke of.

and I'm thinking you should change yours to nudnick131660 but maybe that's just me?

"Quetschen" is German for "to squeeze". Yiddish "qvetshen" derives from the German word, probably because of its funny sound.

It is just your self importance. Your words and actions are those of the "seducees" and of the "viper." And yet I tell you truthfully that they are not the words of your true self.

Unless you mend your ways and stop fauning at the altar of self, and heed to God, God will crush you, just as man crushes the viper.

Nightshades, I understand your point and its one well taken.  We must become one with the Absolute and often, too often, text is take to be the proof rather than the experience of the Infinite. From my point of view, there are three pillars, so to speak, of spiritual practice.  These are Study, Prayer/Meditation, and Loving-kindness.  Over time and with diligent practice, these become one in the same.

Sometimes, however, practitioners get caught up in one or the other of these pillars. Fundeis (of whatever sect) see text less as a gateway than as an end in itself supporting their understanding of their relationshp to the Absolute.  Some get stuck in prayer/meditation and forget that there are precepts to follow, texts that assist in guiding our practice ands so on.  Still others think that their pure loving-kindness will get them close to the Infinite, or even that the Infinite is irrelevant to their practice.

 

The Buddha taught that becoming consumed with any one way, gate, or pillar, is "dukkha" a suffering caused by being out of balance.

 

On the other hand, as we integrate all three pillars, as the inside and outside, small mind and large mind come together as they naturally exist, then we can speak with authority.  We take up text and understand that it is but a finger pointing to the moon; we take up prayer and know that we and the object of our prayer are actually one, and that our acts of loving-kindness are without reference to self they are universal gestures.

In this, however, we must not become smug.  Each is along their own way, walking at their own pace.  A wise teacher offers teaching appropriate to that place and pace.

Be well. 

   

Nightshades,
Could you cite the Scripture passage?




Sodaiho,

Could you cite the Scripture passage?

Ahhh, I see now.  I was referring to the Gospel of Mary Link.

Chapter 9

1) When Mary had said this, she fell silent, since it was to this point that the Savior had spoken with her.

2) But Andrew answered and said to the brethren, Say what you wish to say about what she has said. I at least do not believe that the Savior said this. For certainly these teachings are strange ideas.

3) Peter answered and spoke concerning these same things.

4) He questioned them about the Savior: Did He really speak privately with a woman and not openly to us? Are we to turn about and all listen to her? Did He prefer her to us?

5) Then Mary wept and said to Peter, My brother Peter, what do you think? Do you think that I have thought this up myself in my heart, or that I am lying about the Savior?

6) Levi answered and said to Peter, Peter you have always been hot tempered.

7) Now I see you contending against the woman like the adversaries.

8) But if the Savior made her worthy, who are you indeed to reject her? Surely the Savior knows her very well.

9) That is why He loved her more than us. Rather let us be ashamed and put on the perfect Man, and separate as He commanded us and preach the gospel, not laying down any other rule or other law beyond what the Savior said.

so you're going to a counterfeit to prove your point? A book filled with errors and contradictions and not accepted by traditional Christianity?

Would you like me to present facts about you from an "unauthorized version" instead of going to those whom you are the closest to? Should I just ignore your own words and instead use only those words from outsiders who will help corroborate my agenda?

Kind of reminds me of those Kitty Kelly books that came out a few years ago. Let's not go to the direct sources but instead let's go to those outside the loop; those on the fringe to get those "facts" so we can prove ourselves right.  :NOTSURE: 

KFC, this is a codex (link) from the 4th or 5th century.  Not a "counterfeit". That it is not canonical does not render it as any less worthy of study, just as we study the Dead  Sea Scrolls to offer context to biblical times.  The gospels as they stand in your current New Testament are a collection  of Mss. edited and revised by early church founders.  In order to get a clear understanding of the actual context of the times, its important to look at all sources.

So, no, you should not ignore my words, but you should also look at sources not under my control.  No one is not going to the sources, they are, in fact, going to all sources.

You consider Mary Magdalene an outsider?

 

Sohaido, I do understand your point, and I do appreciate it. But sometimes a rebuke can not be gentle, sometimes it must be harsh. Shock is sometimes a better tool. It reminds our real selves of where we should be looking and to whom. It was her self importance that was rebuked, and self importance is not a natural part of any of us, it is not us. It has simply convinced us that it is.

It was not KFC personally that I critized, but her words. I stated specifically that I knew that the words did not come from her true self. Her true self is a wonderful being, capable of great love and compassion and she posesses the truth of THE I AM within her, you all have the same qualities. If this were not so, THE I AM would not have chosen her for this meassage. Not her or anyone else here. I didn't chose to come here, nor did I chose the people that were to receive the message, neither choice was mine to make.

Paul of Tarsus was a viper. He changed the meanings of the gospels with just enought of the truth sprinkled in to make it palatable because if he hadn't, those who had already heard the word, and did believe in the words of Jesus would not have followed him. He did this in order to forward his own agenda. We are never seduced by outright lies, but by twisting the truth to mean something else. He hunted the apostles and wanted to destroy them, he hated the message of Jesus, but knowing that it was highly unlikely that he'd be able to find them all before they'd spread the word too far, he all of a sudden had an epiphany, and changed his ways. How convenient! There is no witness to this supposed conversation and no proof that it happened. He usurped Peters authority and he's literally seduced an entire nation of peoples. Peter although he was an apostle, still was a slave to his own self importance. (as evidenced by his own denial of Jesus, because he was afraid for the loss of his own life) He made a few feeble attempts to fight Paul, but they were half hearted at best. Paul appealed to Peters sense of self importance, and eventually Peter fell. He should have known that he couldn't have fought him on his own, but with God's help he could have. He relied on his own power of authority instead of on God's.


Jesus did not say that it was acceptable to wage war and kill ones enemies. He said exactly the opposite. Jesus did not believe that women should have a subserviant place, nor did he believe that they couldn't speak the truth as well as a man. He had female disciples as well as male. Women made far better disciples than men, they had less self importance to over come, due to their positions in life. No one was telling their daughters that they were all that important, but they were their sons.

When someone quotes and follows Paul of Tarsus they are not following Jesus and they are not following the truth. God demands that his chosen follow the truth.

So I take it you do not believe in free will?

I believe in free will. I still have my free will. I didn't give it away nor abandon it, but I freely chose to try to master my self importance in order to be able to hear God. It's taken me a lifetime to be able to set it aside most of the time. I still haven't totally mastered it, nor probably will I. Self importance is more devious than anything or anyone that one could imagine. It is the "satan" that the bible and christians speak of. Just when one thinks one's mastered it, surprise!!! it sneaks up on you and shows you you haven't. It never really goes away, and I will no doubt have to struggle with it for the rest of my life. I didn't chose here or these people however. THE I AM always does the choosing, and always chooses the words. I just do the listening.

There is no passage in the bible Lula that says Paul of Tarsus was jealous. Who would say it? Paul of Tarsus? Why should he cut his own throat? And why should the men who put together the accepted books cut their own throats either. That would have been contrary to what his agenda and theirs was. It is indicated in his words that women should not teach the scripture. And in the fact that the historical evidence of women teaching and administering the gospel in the home vanished shortly after his rise to prominence.

Peter was no different, and neither were some of the other apostles when it came to the women disciples. Jealousy is a human trait due to our own sense of self importance. The apostles argued amongst themselves as to who was the greatest of them, and Jesus rebuked them for it. Men had always been more important, they'd always held the reins of power. That was according to them and their traditions their god given right. Taking that power out of their hands and placing it in the hands of women whom they considered beneath them must have been quite a shock indeed.

Lula, I tell you what I am about to tell you because I have been instructed to do so. You have found favor in God's eyes. Why? I don't know. Perhaps if I knew you better I would have some idea.

nightshades, do you consider yourself a prophet then?

No, I am no prophet, simply a messenger.

can you elaborate?