|
Post by Abby-Joy on Sept 15, 2018 15:39:10 GMT -5
Our daughters are ages 19, 23, and 24 (soon to be 25). They all live on their own... the younger 2 are roommates with another friend their age. They all support themselves, and yet, they are still under our cover. My husband has often given financial assistance when needed (bills, vehicle care, groceries, etc), and they are all on our medical insurance through his work. We still pay the cell phone bill for our youngest daughter. I know times have changed, but we still see it as our responsibility to provide if needed. (And that mostly falls on my husband, their father.) My preference would be that they lived nearby, but they're all 4 to 5 hours away. I look at it like this. Our culture is messed up. It is moving further and further away from scriptural teachings. We should never conform to the cultural changes. Doing that is why the church is in such a mess today. We should follow scripture as written, even those so called things that were cultural norms 2000 years ago. I am not speaking of following every tradition from 2000 years ago, but every Biblical teaching from 2000 years ago. If the Bible says we should do something in a certain way, that does not change. I am not to justify not following something because times have changed.
The Bible has one way of doing things and the culture another. They are at odds with each other. I would greatly encourage everyone to write down how the Bible says to do things and how our modern society does things side by side and notice the differences. Instead of trying to conform to the changes, what would happen if we all refused to do that and held to scripture? We are to be a peculiar people. We are a chosen generation. We are to come out from among the world and be a separate people. How do we justify rejecting scripture based on how times have changed? Will God accept that when we stand before him?
I believe you and your husband are doing the right thing regarding your daughters Abby.
I agree! Thank you, John. They all know that if they ever need to, they could move back home with us without any hesitation. We've helped our 2 oldest get cars when theirs quit running. It's what parents do... if they're able.
I've seen so much abuse of the fatherly role, in a church we were part of for 13 yrs. It was very imbalanced and used as a way to control pretty much every aspect of one's life (no matter who you were, male or female, married or unmarried). I wish we had gotten out of that place much sooner, as it had some effect on our 3 oldest children (2 daughters, 1 son). But we are doing our best to "detox" (Biblically) from that and see more and more how God intended us to live.
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 15, 2018 15:52:03 GMT -5
Brother John, I ask you to read the book of Ruth with a fresh set of eyes. Also take another look at Esther. The Bible gives us no clear example of a woman who executed successful ministry with no male guardian. Jesus even asked John to adopt His mother. Mary and Martha lived with Lazarus. I don’t expect you to just take my word for it. Just study on it and tell me what you think. I do plan to examine it more closely. What you are saying is something nobody I know of is teaching. The only person I know of that is close is Bill Gothard, and his ministry was destroyed based on unproven accusations. I have no idea if they are true or made up because they were many years after the fact. It does make sense. So does your interpretation of that verse about Fathers. I admit I never fully understood it, but neither did I spend much time on it. You said I helped you see things you hadn't before, and it appears you have helped clear something up for me.
I love the story of Ruth. She was a true example of a Godly woman. There was a thread at WCF a long time back asking men which woman in the Bible they thought would be their ideal wife, and my choice was Ruth. Esther is an interesting story too. She most certainly did have a male figure advising her. She also took the place of the rebellious queen Vashti, and was just the opposite type of woman. If we are open minded, we can learn from each other, no matter how many times we have read the Bible and how much we think we know. Nobody can re-read the Bible without learning more things they overlooked in the past.
|
|
|
Post by Abby-Joy on Sept 15, 2018 15:59:04 GMT -5
Brother John, I ask you to read the book of Ruth with a fresh set of eyes. Also take another look at Esther. The Bible gives us no clear example of a woman who executed successful ministry with no male guardian. Jesus even asked John to adopt His mother. Mary and Martha lived with Lazarus. I don’t expect you to just take my word for it. Just study on it and tell me what you think. I for one, appreciate you sharing your views, Candance. I don't see any conflict with Scripture in what you've written - at all! It's refreshing, and wish society functioned more on this level. With so much wounding in our history (personally speaking), I can understand why my daughters are on their own. It is a balance we've found that we still let them know we're always here to help, support, pray, etc. And I pray that they will allow the Lord to heal their wounds in all these areas so that they can bring up their children in a more Biblically balanced way (should the Lord tarry that long).
|
|
|
Post by tlsitd on Sept 15, 2018 16:29:27 GMT -5
Mmm...I think it's a bit of an over-generalization to say that all single women who have no man in their life are or become feminist man-haters, or that they are all loose cannons, running around doing whatever they please---generally evil---and sponging off of the resources of the church. (Really, sister?) Does the Lord only guide women who have a man in their life? Does He not also guide those who do not? If they are single, they should be following Him in submission to His authority in their lives and doing His will.
I know it was the tradition of previous generations and societies for women who did not marry to live with their parents, and that their father was their authority until they married and provided for them (part of the reason their fathers wanted to marry them off); and unmarried women cared for their parents in their old age. Sometimes they worked with their fathers in a family business. That was the way it worked; but obviously, times have changed and that is not always the way things work today. And not all cases are the same either. I don't believe that it's always God's will for an adult unmarried woman to live with her father; that's something she would have to know by faith, whether it is or isn't. Sometimes it may not even be possible. But the pastor does not take the role of her spiritual head if she is unmarried and not in her father's household. The New Testament doesn't teach this.
It does teach that the head of every man in the church (not of every woman) is Christ, and that the head of every married woman is her husband. In every case in which a woman's spiritual head is referred to, it is with regard to husbands and wives, not daughters and fathers. The wife is a part of her husband's body just as the church (the brothers) is Christ's body.
In Biblical times, unmarried women lived in their fathers' households unless they married, and their father was their authority because they lived with him and he provided for them, and he filled the role of a spiritual authority---or else another near male relative. (This is what I understand.) It wasn't the custom for unmarried women to live alone or to provide for themselves. It just wasn't the way society worked back then---or even up until recent centuries.
But society has changed, and while I am anti-feminism, I do believe that Scriptural teachings sometimes (not always) have to be considered in the light of the way things are today. That way of doing things just doesn't work for most people today, for various reasons. Most fathers would probably be indignant at the thought of having to support an unmarried daughter, and would tell her she needed to get a job. He might not want her to live with him either. Not all women have fathers, or male relatives who would fill that role. And, obviously, not all fathers or male relatives of a Christian woman are Christians and would be willing to follow Christian rules. A woman's father might be of some other religion with different rules. In the OT example, everyone to whom that arrangement pertained was of the same religion. It would be like America being Christian (which it isn't), and a theocracy, with everyone living according to the teachings of Christianity. Christians have no such nation today as the Jews had, where everyone in that society lived by the same religious laws.
Every Christian's personal situation is different, and every Christian woman has to do whatever she knows the Lord's will for her to be---which is hardly the same as being a "loose cannon".
Paul never said anywhere that he wanted every woman to have a male head of household. He told Timothy not to enroll the younger widows (under the age of 60) in the church distribution, because, according to their whims, they would eventually want to get married---not because it was the Lord's will for them to, but just because they wanted to, which would have been a breach of faith for someone who had purposed to remain single after her husband died, and was put on the dole with that expectation and commitment. Then he said that if these young women were put on the dole (rather than devoting themselves to charitable works) they would become idle gossips, going about from house to house. So it was better that they marry and have a husband provide for them than rely on the church to do so. Whenever Paul recommended marriage for a woman, it was always as an alternative to something less desirable, whether it was ungodly behavior (as in the case of the widows he mentioned in 1 Timothy 5), or divided devotion to the Lord (1 Corinthians 7:32-35).
I will also add that Corrie Ten Boom and her father were both Christians (Mr. Ten Boom was a devout Christian), Esther and Mordecai were both Jews, and that Queen Elizabeth and Joan of Arc and their lives really have nothing to do with Christian women and the Bible's instructions for them. Joan of Arc was definitely not following the Lord's commands (if she was even a true Christian), and Queen Elizabeth was an ungodly woman who was also definitely not following Jesus Christ---whatever those women may have thought or what others may have thought about them. (That's like Christian men using the Crusaders as an example of something for the church.) I see a real serious error here. The Bible is either God's Word or it is not. If it is God's Word, tradition did not influence it's pages. If tradition influenced it's teachings, then it is not God's Word. It is a mix of men's thoughts and God's inspiration. That is what all too many teach today to justify not following scripture. PG4him brought up some things I hadn't fully understood and considered, and they are things I need to look into further, but if the Bible indicates a single woman is under her Father's authority till she marries, then that is what God desires, period. This notion that since times have changed, we should change is dangerous! It has led to a major mess where the culture is influencing the church rather than the church influencing the culture.
Your name indicates you want to be a light shining in the darkness, and if we are truly going to be a light, we are to be different. We are supposed to follow scripture, even if they are promoting things that are foreign in today's world. Who cares if most men don't want to take care of their single daughters till they marry? If the Bible says that is the right thing to do, it is the right thing to do. That should be the attitude. If I had a daughter, and I saw the Bible teaching that, I would gladly follow it. My position is that if the Bible says it is right, it is right. If the Bible says it is wrong, it is wrong. I don't care about how times have changed. The changes are wrong, not the Bible. You need to seriously re-think this.
The head of every man is Christ. He is the head of every Christian. The woman is supposed to obey her husband in everything, according to scripture, but Christ is over all of us. What that means in practical terms is the wife is to obey anything her husband tell her unless he tells her to sin. He can't demand his wife sin because Christ is over all. Women are not without authority because they are single.
I think you should re-read what I said in that post, brother. It didn't have anything to do with changing the teachings of the Bible to fit the times. How do you propose that a Christian woman with no father, or an unsaved father, or a father with mental problems or something else, compel him to take care of her? I think I raised some good points in my response to PG4Him; why not address those things instead of painting the post with a black brush as an attack on the relevance and authority of the Bible in our time?
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 15, 2018 16:36:01 GMT -5
Don't you think women had fathers who were unsaved or had mental problems 2000 years ago? You were speaking of how times and the culture have changed, so that is what I focused on.
|
|
|
Post by tlsitd on Sept 15, 2018 16:41:14 GMT -5
Our daughters are ages 19, 23, and 24 (soon to be 25). They all live on their own... the younger 2 are roommates with another friend their age. They all support themselves, and yet, they are still under our cover. My husband has often given financial assistance when needed (bills, vehicle care, groceries, etc), and they are all on our medical insurance through his work. We still pay the cell phone bill for our youngest daughter. I know times have changed, but we still see it as our responsibility to provide if needed. (And that mostly falls on my husband, their father.) My preference would be that they lived nearby, but they're all 4 to 5 hours away. I look at it like this. Our culture is messed up. It is moving further and further away from scriptural teachings. We should never conform to the cultural changes. Doing that is why the church is in such a mess today. We should follow scripture as written, even those so called things that were cultural norms 2000 years ago. I am not speaking of following every tradition from 2000 years ago, but every Biblical teaching from 2000 years ago. If the Bible says we should do something in a certain way, that does not change. I am not to justify not following something because times have changed.
The Bible has one way of doing things and the culture another. They are at odds with each other. I would greatly encourage everyone to write down how the Bible says to do things and how our modern society does things side by side and notice the differences. Instead of trying to conform to the changes, what would happen if we all refused to do that and held to scripture? We are to be a peculiar people. We are a chosen generation. We are to come out from among the world and be a separate people. How do we justify rejecting scripture based on how times have changed? Will God accept that when we stand before him?
I believe you and your husband are doing the right thing regarding your daughters Abby.
It's not a matter of rejecting Scripture or changing it to fit the times, but of knowing what applies to Christians and how to apply those teachings to the present time. There's a big difference. Appropriate application in this way shouldn't be conflated with what the majority of Christians are doing in putting the teachings of men and the ways of the world and the culture in which they live before the teachings of the Bible, or trying to make the teachings of Christianity fit the times, to allow Christians to fit in with the culture and do what it does. It's not about adapting the Scriptures to different times and a different culture but about applying their teachings correctly in different times and a different culture, without compromising doctrine.
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Sept 15, 2018 16:43:12 GMT -5
The name-and-claim mistake in faith doesn't just go in one direction. It isn't always about money, ambition, etc. Misguided Christians can just as easily name-and-claim a lifestyle of poverty, bondage, loneliness, etc which God might not will for them. If God has put a proper, healthy desire in a person which doesn't go away with prayer and fasting, doesn't seem to lessen over time, and would obviously help him be more fruitful in ministry, he should probably take it as a message that God wills it for his life. It isn't wise to double down on a life of false piety when God isn't giving grace to be happy that way. This is part of how God shows us His will. Yes we all sacrifice for the Kingdom, but if you "sacrifice" to the point that you're miserable, alone, fruitless, powerless, and unable to relate to others, there is a problem. Paul built numerous churches in various cities. He closely mentored future pastors. He was too busy for marriage, and he didn't seem to feel sad about it. That's what life should be like for a man called to celibacy. He is "married" to a very fruitful ministry. A man in this situation will know he doesn't want a wife. If Paul's calling is not placed on a man, he cannot name-and-claim that he doesn't want to marry. A great supply of faith is actually needed to move ahead into a new life when God calls you to go. He tells you to start a business and He will send the customers; you're terrified, but you do it, and He provides. He tells you to buy a house and He will provide for it as His own property; you're terrified, but you do it, and He pays the bills. He tells you to find a wife because you're called to raise righteous children in a wicked world; you're terrified, but you get married. Living alone in a tent to prove your piety is not the best definition of faith. So no, a man should not marry the first girl who says yes in order to have sex -- and Paul's words didn't say that. If a man cannot seem to be happy alone, and the burning won't stop no matter how much he tries, then he should patiently look for a virtuous woman he can love.
|
|
|
Post by tlsitd on Sept 15, 2018 16:47:24 GMT -5
Don't you think women had fathers who were unsaved or had mental problems 2000 years ago? You were speaking of how times and the culture have changed, so that is what I focused on.
What point or points in my post did you object to specifically, that you thought it was an attack on the relevance and authority of Scripture in our time?
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Sept 15, 2018 16:56:38 GMT -5
We got some thinkers up in the house today . So I beg all to hear a reminder I have been reminding all of us about . Ya thinker will be transformed the more YOU READ THE WORD . We wont be thinking , we will be A KNOWING . Got to let them words transform those thoughts and let those thinkers be transformed . While I seen some good thoughts , BECAUSE they did agree and line up with scripture , not all thoughts were good , their were still in thinker realm BUT as I said , the more we read that bible , the more those thoughts will become TRUTH instead of what we think is best . WE WILL KNOW VERY SOLID what is best , for those words coupled with the HOLY GHOST , got a way of digging deep into a man or womans heart . Now folks , I know some have sat in churches , quite possible for years and while I don't see anyone as a servant of satan , I see problems whether they be small or not so small , and if our thinking aint transformed then error is only going to beget error . My dear friends , I advice us all as little children to go back into our bibles . EVEN if you reading it now , INCREASE IT . even if you know the truth, BEING reminded of it , has a way of keeping one sharp and if anything was either dieing or ready to die , them holy words coupled with THE SPIRIT , got a way of sharpening us back up again . Its why we got problmes everywhere . Had I sat in churches my whole life and heard for example pre mid or post trib, It might not have been burned out all at once when I was first drawn . But it will in time . Now issues of sin whole nother story . that has got to get corrected . SO let me just say this one reminder . IF any is in a temptation , REMEMBER its our flesh that does cause that , But no matter what the flesh tempts us with , I CAN ASSURE US all, WE aint victims to its lust to do its beck and call. FOR I say , OH YES I SAY GOD giveth a way OUT of every temptation , AND HIS NAME IS JESUS . so I never want a hear another word of giving in to a lust and making excuse as though it either aint lust or we aint got a way OUT OF IT . POINT TO JESUS not the flesh . I say again POINT TO JESUS and not the flesh . For greater IS HE IN US than our flesh . AND that is a fact .
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Sept 15, 2018 17:09:02 GMT -5
I am going to go set up a post over some of the most common misunderstood things and ask some questions . NOW I already know the answer to these questions I am going to ask . but I wont be saying what they are . I want folks to answer and please back with scripture . but even if you don't remember the exact scripture , at least answer in your heart what you truly believe . Now that is not to condmen , its to help . believe me we need to all agree that we need to agree on sound doctrine . I wont be asking anything about the pre mid or post . It will be questions that concern faith .
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 15, 2018 17:10:37 GMT -5
Don't you think women had fathers who were unsaved or had mental problems 2000 years ago? You were speaking of how times and the culture have changed, so that is what I focused on.
What point or points in my post did you object to specifically, that you thought it was an attack on the relevance and authority of Scripture in our time? Look at how you started your paragraphs. "I know it was the tradition of previous generations..." "In Biblical times..." "But society has changed..." Everything about the post was giving excuses why we don't follow certain teachings.
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Sept 15, 2018 17:18:13 GMT -5
"I know it was the tradition of previous generations..." "In Biblical times..." "But society has changed. OH dear who said that . That sentence should read , I KNOW it was the tradition of previous generations ......in biblical times.... and WHILE society does change . GOD DONT HIS WORD DONT AND WE BETTER KEEP THAT PATTERN .
|
|
|
Post by John on Sept 15, 2018 17:20:29 GMT -5
We got some thinkers up in the house today . So I beg all to hear a reminder I have been reminding all of us about . Ya thinker will be transformed the more YOU READ THE WORD . We wont be thinking , we will be A KNOWING . Got to let them words transform those thoughts and let those thinkers be transformed . While I seen some good thoughts , BECAUSE they did agree and line up with scripture , not all thoughts were good , their were still in thinker realm BUT as I said , the more we read that bible , the more those thoughts will become TRUTH instead of what we think is best . WE WILL KNOW VERY SOLID what is best , for those words coupled with the HOLY GHOST , got a way of digging deep into a man or womans heart . Now folks , I know some have sat in churches , quite possible for years and while I don't see anyone as a servant of satan , I see problems whether they be small or not so small , and if our thinking aint transformed then error is only going to beget error . My dear friends , I advice us all as little children to go back into our bibles . EVEN if you reading it now , INCREASE IT . even if you know the truth, BEING reminded of it , has a way of keeping one sharp and if anything was either dieing or ready to die , them holy words coupled with THE SPIRIT , got a way of sharpening us back up again . Its why we got problmes everywhere . Had I sat in churches my whole life and heard for example pre mid or post trib, It might not have been burned out all at once when I was first drawn . But it will in time . Now issues of sin whole nother story . that has got to get corrected . SO let me just say this one reminder . IF any is in a temptation , REMEMBER its our flesh that does cause that , But no matter what the flesh tempts us with , I CAN ASSURE US all, WE aint victims to its lust to do its beck and call. FOR I say , OH YES I SAY GOD giveth a way OUT of every temptation , AND HIS NAME IS JESUS . so I never want a hear another word of giving in to a lust and making excuse as though it either aint lust or we aint got a way OUT OF IT . POINT TO JESUS not the flesh . I say again POINT TO JESUS and not the flesh . For greater IS HE IN US than our flesh . AND that is a fact . We need to stop seeing the Bible as a group of letters written to people 2000 years ago, and start seeing them as written to us. When we read the epistles, try looking at them as something that came in the mail to our congregation at Narrow Way in 2018, rather than someone else's mail 2000 years ago. That should eliminate all the questions over cultural differences, because it was written for us in 2018, not someone 2000 years ago. God doesn't change. He is the same yesterday, today and forever.
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Sept 15, 2018 17:20:34 GMT -5
Let that get said again . I know it was the tradition of........OF THE APOSTLES , WHO followed WHO , JESUS . THERFORE what any man woman or child , or angel does try to take from that pattern or add error to it , YA FLEE THEM so fast your shadow cant keep up .
|
|
|
Post by frienduff on Sept 15, 2018 17:21:57 GMT -5
THAT is the beauty of it butero. BY GRACE I have ALWAYS SEEN THEM as for us today . THAT is the beauty of it butero. Anyone who sees it not this way , They set up for deception and big time .
|
|