Sexist Jesus

Originally posted by @sonship
Verse 22 is preceded by verse 21 which has ALL the believers being being subject to one another.

[b] " Being subject to one another in the fear of Christ." (Eph. 5:21)

The tone is subjection all around among the churching Christians.

The previous verse 18 shows that for this the believers need to be in the enjoyment ...[text shortened]... flows through the unit - husband and wife, that their petitioning power before God is effective.[/b]

Are you trying to say wives are not to submit to their husbands?

Originally posted by @eladar
Are you trying to say wives are not to submit to their husbands?

No.

" Being subject to one another in the fear of Christ " (v.21)

Are you saying Christians should not be subject to one another in the fear of Christ too, along with the exhortation for wives to submit to their own husbands ?

"Husbands, love your wives even as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her." (v.25)

Are you saying that the Christian husband should not love his wife as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her ? Is that what you are saying ... verse 22 is really important but verse 25 is not ?

" And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissolution, but be filled in spirit." (v.18)

Are you saying do not be filled in spirit but rather just fill up on wine and indulge in fleshy dissolution ? Is that what you are saying ??

" ... fellow heirs of the grace of life, that your prayers may not be hindered." (1 Pet. 3:7c)

Are you saying that heirs together of the grace of life for husband and wife doesn't matter?
Are you saying that their ability to get prayers through and answered together doesn't matter ?

I am clear about what I am and am not saying.

Originally posted by @eladar
Are you trying to say wives are not to submit to their husbands?

Now when I started a thread on Christ Conquers Racism you raised objection. Basically you said that that word "Racism" was just a modern construct and should not be used in explaining anything about Christ's salvation.

Something like this: "Oh, Don't mention Racism. Jesus had nothing to do with Racism. That is a liberal thing."

it is a bit peculiar and hypocritical that you don't mind adopting the modern term "Sexist" in order to teach your concern for submissive Christian wives.

This is kind of two faced Elader. You don't have "Sexism" mentioned in the New Testament anymore than you have "Racism" mentioned there, do you ?

You're coming on like this : "Don't talk about Jesus conquers Racism. But I can talk about "Sexist Jesus".

it seems that you're full of sympathy for one problem but apathetic about another.
Ever think to be enlarged to appreciate the all-encompassing nature of Christ's salvation ?

Originally posted by @sonship
Now when I started a thread on [b]Christ Conquers Racism you raised objection. Basically you said that that word "Racism" was just a modern construct and should not be used in explaining anything about Christ's salvation.

Something like this: "Oh, Don't mention Racism. Jesus had nothing to do with Racism. That is a liberal thing." ...[text shortened]... er.
Ever think to be enlarged to appreciate the all-encompassing nature of Christ's salvation ?[/b]

I am saying that by modern standards Christianity is sexist.

Originally posted by @sonship
No.

[b] " Being subject to one another in the fear of Christ " (v.21)

Are you saying Christians should not be subject to one another in the fear of Christ too, along with the exhortation for wives to submit to their own husbands ?

[quote] "Husbands, love your wives even as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up ...[text shortened]... through and answered together doesn't matter ?

I am clear about what I am and am not saying.

Of course Christians are subject to Christ.

Originally posted by @eladar
I am saying that by modern standards Christianity is sexist.

While you wish to be a little provocative, why can't I?

By "modern standards" Jesus Christ in us can conquer Racism ?

Is what is good for the goose also good for the gander here ?

Originally posted by @eladar

Hold on. Look carefully at the passage.

Fear of Christ is to result in being subject to one another.
Of course Christians are subject to one another when they are in the fear of Christ.

I think that is how I would put it.

"Being subject to ONE ANOTHER ... in the fear of Christ." (Eph. 5:21)

You like the part about all Christians subject to Christ.
Good beginning.

Do you say Amen to what is says about being "subject to ONE ANOTHER ..." in the fear of Christ ?

Of course Christians are subject to Christ.

Of course if we realize that we all must stand before Christ to give an account of how we treated the brothers and sisters belonging TO Christ, we would be subject to one another.

After all, Christ lives in that brother.
After all, Christ lives in that sister.
After all, all the believers in Christ are indwelt with BY Christ.

Isn't this in the same spirit as of First Peter 5:5 ?

" In like manner, younger men, be subject to elders; and all of you gird yourselves with humility toward one another,

Because God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble.

Therefore be humbled under the mighty hand of God that He may exalt you in due time." (1 Pet. 5:5,6)

So we all need Jesus Christ. For humility IS Christ. He can be for us the all around humility that we need - all of the believers and each believing husband and each believing wife.

Any comment on no female disciples?

Originally posted by @eladar
Any comment on no female disciples?

You don't believe that there were any female disciples of Jesus in the New Testament ?

-sonship

Originally posted by @gswilm
You don't believe that there were any female disciples of Jesus in the New Testament ?

-sonship

Not the official 12, nor were women allowed positions of authority over men.

Originally posted by @eladar
Not the official 12, nor were women allowed positions of authority over men.

This was your question:

Any comment on no female disciples?

If you meant to talk about something else, why not just straight-forwardly specify that something else ?

The last time you met with your congregation did you greet the other male participants with "a holy kiss" ? Hey, you really want to follow Paul's instructions, Right ?

Everything by the book! Right ?

" Greet one another with a holy kiss." (Rom. 16:16a)

So you've been reminding the woman to be in subjection - according to the instruction of the Apostle Paul. Are you also dutifully greeting the other men with "a holy kiss" ?

When was the last time you went to the men's fellowship time and greeted another male disciple with a holy kiss ?

- sonship

Originally posted by @gswilm
This was your question:

Any comment on no female disciples?

If you meant to talk about something else, why not just straight-forwardly specify that something else ?

The last time you met with your congregation did you greet the other male participants with [b]"a holy kiss" ? Hey, you really want to follow Paul's instructi ...[text shortened]... to the men's fellowship time and greeted another male disciple with a holy kiss ?

- sonship[/b]

I am not reminding women about it, I am stating how it was. You keep trying to change the topic after having been put in your place.

Originally posted by @eladar
Are you trying to say wives are not to submit to their husbands?

One-track mind much?

Originally posted by @suzianne
One-track mind much?

Just trying to clarify whay that squirrel of a mind is trying to communicate.

Originally posted by @eladar
I am not reminding women about it, I am stating how it was. You keep trying to change the topic after having been put in your place.

What place did you put me in ?
There were and still are women disciples.

I am happily married to a Christian woman for over 35 years.
We each know out standing before the Lord and we are indeed heirs together of the grace of Christ.

I don't know what "place" you imagine you put me into to.

So you're selective about your preferences ?
Women better be subject according to the book.
But to greet the brothers with a holy kiss ??
That's another story ?

- sonship