[net.religion] A biblical view of "male".

billd@bolton.UUCP (Bill Duffy) (08/15/84)

               Although I agree fully with the  Scriptures  references
          to  God in the male form. (Netnews soon to come on that sub-
          ject). I must disagree with todays connotations of  what  is
          really "male".  Let me explain by comparing some scriptures.

               Today men (and women) display the fruits of  the  flesh
          as described in the following verses. Some of these are par-
          ticularly associated with the "male  superiority"  of  which
          the netlander complained.

              "... fornication, uncleaness, loose conduct,  idola-
              try,   practice   of  spiritism,  enmities,  strife,
              jealousy, fits  of  anger,  contentions,  divisions,
              sects,  envies,  drunken bouts, revelries and things
              like these."
                Gal. 5:19-21

              "... lovers of themselves, lovers  of  money,  self-
              assuming,   haughty,   blasphemers,  disobedient  to
              parents, unthankful, disloyal, having no natural af-
              fection,   not  open  to  any  agreement,  slanders,
              without self-control, fierce, without love of  good-
              ness,   betrayers,   head-strong,  puffed  up  [with
              pride], lovers of pleasures rather  than  lovers  of
              God,  having  a  form  of godly devotion but proving
              false to its power;"
                2 Tim. 3:2-5


               Instead of the "fruits of the flesh", each  person  who
          *claims* to be "christian" should display the "fruits of the
          spirit" as described by the following:

              "On the other hand, the fruitage of  the  spirit  is
              love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering, kindness, good-
              ness, faith, mildness, self-control."
                Gal. 5:22,23

                "If we are living by spirit, let us go on  walking
              orderly also by spirit.  Let us not become egotisti-
              cal, stirring up competition with one another, envy-
              ing one another."
                Gal. 5:25,26


               Again, do the following scriptures support the  current
          "macho" exhibited by men towards their wives and families?

              "Husbands, continue loving your wives, just  as  the
              Christ  also loved the congregation and delivered up
              himself for it,"
                Eph. 5:25

                "In this way husbands ought  to  be  loving  their
              wives  as  their  own  bodies. He who loves his wife
              loves himself, for no man ever hated his own  flesh;
              but  he  feeds  and cherishes it, as the Christ also
              does the congregation,"
                Eph. 5:28,29

              "Nevertheless, also, let each one of you so love his
              wife as he does himself; on the other hand, the wife
              should have deep respect for her husband."
                Eph. 5:33

              "You husbands, keep on loving your wives and do  not
              be bitterly angry with them."
                Col. 3:19

              "Whatever you are doing, work at it whole-souled  as
              to  Jehovah, and not to men, for you know that it is
              from Jehovah you will receive the due reward of  the
              inheritance. Slave for the Master, Christ. Certainly
              the one that is doing wrong will receive  back  what
              he wrongly did, and there is no partiality."
                Col. 3:23-25

              "That statement is faithful.
                If any man is reaching out for office of overseer,
              he  is  desirous of a fine work. The overseer should
              therefore be irreprehensible, a husband of one wife,
              moderate  in habits, sound in mind, orderly, hospit-
              able, qualified to teach, not a drunken brawler, not
              a  smiter,  but  reasonable,  not belligerent, not a
              lover of money, a man presiding over his own  house-
              hold in a fine manner, having children in subjection
              with all seriousness; (if indeed any  man  does  not
              know how to preside over his own household, how will
              he take care of God's  congregation?)  not  a  newly
              converted  man, for fear that he might get puffed up
              [with pride] and fall into the judgment passed  upon
              the Devil. Moreover, he should also have a fine tes-
              timony from people on the outside, in order that  he
              might  not fall into reproach and a snare of the De-
              vil.
                Ministerial servants should likewise  be  serious,
              not double-tonged, not giving themselves to a lot of
              wine, not greedy of dishonest gain, holding the  sa-
              cred secret of the faith with a clean conscience."
                1 Tim. 3:1-9

                "Let ministerial servants be husbands of one wife,
              presiding  in  a fine manner over children and their
              own households. For the men who minister in  a  fine
              manner  are acquiring for themselves a fine standing
              and great freeness of speech in the faith in connec-
              tion with Christ Jesus."
                1 Tim. 3:12,13


               I hope that this information  may  be  useful  to  help
          explain that when God established the family arrangement, He
          did not intend that the male have  dominance,  but  headship
          (there  is a difference). Satan the devil is the one that is
          responsible for the corruption of this  loving  relationship
          that today causes many women to groan.

              "May the Lord of peace Himself give you  peace  con-
              stantly in every way, the Lord be with all of you."
                2 Thes. 3:16


                                  Bill Duffy
                                  GenRad
                                  genrad!!billd

          All biblical quotations are taken from the "New World Trans-
          lation  of  the Holy Scriptures". The opinions expressed are
          purely my own and do not necessarily  reflect  those  of  my
          employer.

cmm@pixadv.UUCP (cmm) (08/18/84)

>               I hope that this information  may  be  useful  to  help
>          explain that when God established the family arrangement, He
>          did not intend that the male have  dominance,  but  headship
>          (there  is a difference). Satan the devil is the one that is
>          responsible for the corruption of this  loving  relationship
>          that today causes many women to groan.
>
>                                  Bill Duffy
>                                  GenRad
>                                  genrad!!billd

I would appreciate your view of the difference between sex determined
"dominance", and a religional mandated, sex determined, unquestionable
"headship".

I contend that any sex specific role pattern is intrinsically unfair and
discriminatory.  If a woman is not considered "worthy" of "heading" the
family, then how can she possible be considered appropriate to head a
company, or dictate the kind of medical care required by a patient, or
pilot a ship, or to fill any leadership position?

Once you have established *ANY* sex difference, then the rationalizations
come from the powerful parties -- men -- to extend the rationalizations, 
and "protect" women as non-persons.

Any religion that mandates a subordinate position for anyone based on 
their sex, or even their beliefs, is a religion that I can not partake in.
I want to live in a world where my companion/lover is just as strong as
I am.  I want my daughters to have as much chance for personal life as
I have.  I want to live in a world of people.  Not MEN, not WOMEN, not
CHRISTIANs, not JEWs, not HINDUs -- but a world of people accepting each
other as equals, and treating each other fairly.

(If this belongs in another newsgroup (like net.flame), I am sorry.)




-- 
____________________________________________________________________________
cmm   (carl m mikkelsen)    | (617)657-8720x2310
Pixel Computer Incorporated |
260 Fordham Road	    | {allegra|ihnp4|cbosgd|ima|genrad|amd|harvard}\
Wilmington, Ma.  01887	    |     !wjh12!pixel!pixadv!cmm