tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post7723068617693783266..comments2023-10-20T07:28:50.948-07:00Comments on Better Bibles Blog: head and submission poll results - post #2Wayne Lemanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-77006991349788222862007-09-14T13:36:00.000-07:002007-09-14T13:36:00.000-07:00Daniel,Just a little tip. You might want to think ...Daniel,<BR/><BR/>Just a little tip. You might want to think about whether 2 Tim. 2:2 really means just "faithful men", or whether it means "faithful people" as the Greek says. This is one of those verses where a certain paradigm has been laid over the plain sense of the text. Too bad Holman chose to make common cause with the ESV on this.Suzanne McCarthyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07033350578895908993noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-70310101825280621352007-09-14T06:17:00.000-07:002007-09-14T06:17:00.000-07:00Daniel, I'm curious which translation this comes f...Daniel, I'm curious which translation this comes from:<BR/><BR/>"you will desire to control your husband, but he will rule over you" (Gen. 3:16)<BR/><BR/>A quick perusal of the translations I have at hand all have God saying to the woman that she will desire her husband, not desire to control him.<BR/><BR/>Also, the husband's ruling over is never a command to the husband, nor is accepting such rulership ever commanded of the wife.Psalmisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12844681463669483309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-77203090175310549052007-09-12T13:56:00.000-07:002007-09-12T13:56:00.000-07:00Thanks again, Wayne. I'm not satisfied yet, but I...Thanks again, Wayne. I'm not satisfied yet, but I'll definitely keep your points in consideration as I study it.<BR/><BR/>DanielDaniel Goepfrichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07991001930187063021noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-34146819153321472252007-09-12T12:58:00.000-07:002007-09-12T12:58:00.000-07:00Nicely put, Wayne.My friend Jon Case who teaches a...Nicely put, Wayne.<BR/><BR/>My friend Jon Case who teaches at Houghton College gave some wonderful lectures on the mutuality within the Trinity. He said one example of their mutual submission is in the way the Father depended on the actions of the Son to accomplish the inauguration of the kingdom. <BR/><BR/>Cases explains the three persons of the godhead are mutually distnct, mutually dependent and mutually honoring. The more I study the relationships among the Trinity, the more I think of marriage as similar. I think the ideal expression of "one flesh" is something like the divine community--not hierarchical but reciprical. Husbands and wives have different strengths, weaknesses and gifts that vary with each couple. They move in and out of different roles--and submitting isn't a role,in my opinion, it is a discreet act--not unlike Jesus submitting to what the Father called him to do on earth, and not unlike the Father depending on Jesus to be faithful to that calling.Beyond Wordshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01588539631307626802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-2467792209760724852007-09-12T12:02:00.000-07:002007-09-12T12:02:00.000-07:00Daniel replied:Wayne, I have a hard time with that...Daniel replied:<BR/><BR/><I>Wayne, I have a hard time with that. Did Christ lift only part of the curse? Why was the hierarchy lifted but not the increased pain in childbirth, the hard toil to survive, or the returning to dust. All of these are a part of the curse (Gen. 3:16-19).</I><BR/><BR/>Very appropriate questions, Daniel, ones which many have struggled with.<BR/><BR/>One thing I would suggest would be for us to very carefully study what actually was the curse. As I understand Gen. 3:16-19, the only curse was upon the serpent. God did not say that he was cursing the woman or the man. The consequences of their sins was that the woman would have pain in childbearing and that her husband would rule over her. There are always consequences for sin, whether before Christ or after Christ. Christ does not remove the consequences of our sins but he has promised to be with us always.<BR/><BR/>I personally am not convinced that God put any curse on either Adam or Eve. Instead, God put a curse on the serpent and on the land.<BR/><BR/>Does Christ's death and resurrection have any effect upon the consequences of Adam and Eve's sins? Absolutely. If it did not, we would have no hope and no salvation. So even though it is a natural tendency for men to rule over their wives, that is not what <BR/>God wants. He instructs men to treat their wives tenderly. Jesus showed us the better way of being a servant to one another.<BR/><BR/>I find nothing in the Bible that tells men to rule their wives. I find nothing that says that women are cursed forever to be ruled by their husbands. Men rule over their wives because men are sinful. But Christ can free men from the sinful tendency to exert power over their wives. I don't want to let the wives off the hook either. We all know that there are sins wives commit, as well, which are part of the sinful nature. But, once again, Christ frees us to live victoriously. We are no longer slaves to sin, says Paul. We do not have to live sinfully when there is freedom through what Christ did for us.Wayne Lemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-12569164447834966222007-09-12T11:45:00.000-07:002007-09-12T11:45:00.000-07:00Daniel responded:I agree that mutual submission is...Daniel responded:<BR/><BR/><I>I agree that mutual submission is the ideal, but I don't see that "looking out for each others interests" (Phil 2:4) excludes an order or "chain of command" within the relationship.</I><BR/><BR/>You're right, Daniel, it doesn't. The larger question is whether or not the Bible teaches a male hierarchy. I do not believe that it does. Others disagree with me. There are no explicit statements either way, so we are left to choose what we believe is closest to our understanding of God's truth, as interpreted from the statements of the Bible and organized into theological systems.<BR/><BR/>I want to try to hold what I believe sincerely and yet not so tightly that I condemn anyone else who holds a different opinion.Wayne Lemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-54402432581764456602007-09-12T10:48:00.000-07:002007-09-12T10:48:00.000-07:00Wayne said:I believe that through Christ the curse...Wayne said:<BR/><BR/><I>I believe that through Christ the curse that you mentioned no longer rules over us.</I><BR/><BR/>Wayne, I have a hard time with that. Did Christ lift only part of the curse? Why was the heirarchy lifted but not the increased pain in childbirth, the hard toil to survive, or the returning to dust. All of these are a part of the curse (Gen. 3:16-19).<BR/><BR/>I have understood the "law of love" to supercede the "law of Moses", not necessarily the universal curse because of sin.<BR/><BR/>I agree that mutual submission is the ideal, but I don't see that "looking out for each others interests" (Phil 2:4) excludes an order or "chain of command" within the relationship.<BR/><BR/>On the Godhead analogy, Jesus frequently submitted to the Father, but I don't find the Father submitting to Him. Again, they can exist in perfect fellowship and harmony without mutual submission and with a heirarchy (1 Cor. 11:3).<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your continuing thoughts.Daniel Goepfrichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07991001930187063021noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-2974402808399136902007-09-12T08:08:00.000-07:002007-09-12T08:08:00.000-07:00Daniel, in case I wasn't clear enough in addressin...Daniel, in case I wasn't clear enough in addressing your specific question, I believe that through Christ the curse that you mentioned no longer rules over us. The hierarchy within marriage is gone. There is a new creation, one that God intended for us from the beginning, but which we lost due to the Fall.Wayne Lemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-46082306892289352022007-09-12T08:02:00.000-07:002007-09-12T08:02:00.000-07:00Glenn commented:I would be really interested in th...Glenn commented:<BR/><BR/><I>I would be really interested in the Bible reference for the Father submitting to the Son or the Holy Spirit as I am experiencing some difficulty in tracking it down.</I><BR/><BR/>Glenn, if I did not state it clearly enough, thank you for this opportunity to do so: I *believe* that there is mutual submission within the Godhead. There are Biblical hints at this, but no explicit statements (just as there are no explicit statements that there is eternal subordinationism within the Godhead), so I must be humble about holding to my belief. One Biblical hint is Jesus saying, "I and my father are one." (John 10:30). Jesus, of course, on numerous occasions said that he was doing whatever the Father wanted. I think everyone agrees that the Son submitted to the Father.<BR/><BR/>My new sense that there is likely mutual submission within the Godhead comes from my understanding of the unity and fellowship that there is within the Godhead. I have had the sense that there is lack of disagreement, that each member of the Godhead honors each other member, that they listen so well to each other. They minister for each other, sometimes one or another being the one to interact with humans.<BR/><BR/>I cannot prove mutual submission within the Godhead (and I could be wrong), but it fits within my understanding of God's call to us to live that way and the way that it is revealed to us that the members of the Godhead do interact with each other.Wayne Lemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-90290823423216170382007-09-12T07:52:00.000-07:002007-09-12T07:52:00.000-07:00Daniel asked:Even under grace we live under the cu...Daniel asked:<BR/><BR/><I>Even under grace we live under the curse of sin and the sin nature. Is not this heirarchy, then, still in place?</I><BR/><BR/>Daniel, my own belief is that Christ has redeemed us from the curse of sin and the sin nature. We can still feel its affect, but God desires us to live victoriously over that affect, living under the new law of love, which, IMO, would include mutual submission of Eph. 5:21.Wayne Lemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18024771201561767893noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-49472861999733998982007-09-12T05:29:00.000-07:002007-09-12T05:29:00.000-07:00I agree that the non-heirarchy is the ideal in mar...I agree that the non-heirarchy is the ideal in marriage. It seems like we were created to be co-rulers over God creation.<BR/><BR/>However, after sin, the curse seems to place a heirarchy of sorts - "you will desire to control your husband, but he will rule over you" (Gen 3:16).<BR/><BR/>Even under grace we live under the curse of sin and the sin nature. Is not this heirarchy, then, still in place?Daniel Goepfrichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07991001930187063021noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11875966.post-54813582519461585772007-09-12T01:28:00.000-07:002007-09-12T01:28:00.000-07:00I would be really interested in the Bible referenc...I would be really interested in the Bible reference for the Father submitting to the Son or the Holy Spirit as I am experiencing some difficulty in tracking it down.Glennsphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18157051195736064330noreply@blogger.com