Cheryl

Hi Martin,

You have my blessing to post my blog in Danish. Go for it!

Thank you Rusty for your comments! Two things I would like to comment back on. In 1 Cor. 11:3 although the NASB says the man is the head of the woman, the understanding in commentaries is always that it is speaking of husband and wife. I am sure you would agree that no other man is the head of your wife and you personally are not the head of every woman you see. Yes once again husband and wife are the context of aner and gune when it is talking about the two in relationship.

Secondly about the singular “she” in verse 15, if we are going to be true to God’s word, we must pay attention to his inspired words and his inspired grammar. I really like the NASB, but their rendering of 1 Timothy 2:15 as “women will be preserved…if they” completely hides the Greek “she” and “they” in this passage. If other versions had not been faithful to the Greek change from singular to plural here, I may not have come to understand this passage as clearly as I have. To complementarians, I ask, please show me who the “she” is and who are the “they” that verse 15 refers to? I believe my exegesis not only explains clearly who “she” and “they” are but keeps the meaning in the complete context of the passage regarding deceived teachers and false doctrine.

I believe that it is completely out of context to interpret verse 12 as Paul stopping godly women teaching correct biblical doctrine to men. With that interpretation we then have Paul questioning the salvation of women in general. The salvation of women in general is never questioned in scripture.

Martin, you are right. God is the ultimate source. He has created us in the physical realm and also given us our new birth through Jesus our Savior.

Hi Martin,

Well the DVD on marriage is in the works in the research stage. It may be a few years for production. I certainly will consider putting another language on the DVD. That would involve needing translation help but it is feasible.

Hi Diane,

When I say two humanities I mean two separate creations with no DNA connection. When sin entered the world, the man took his sinful rule over the woman and this developed to such an extent that women were placed into the category of animals and property. The Talmud which is the Jewish oral law has followed this misogynistic way of looking at women by placing great restrictions on their activities even forbidding men to talk to women in public and giving women little to no rights as human beings. Think about how the woman would have been treated if she had not been formed from the side of Adam. I believe that she would not have been thought of as having the same humanity as Adam. She would have been thought of as so different from him that she would have had very little worth regarding even her life and death and who knows how far the abuse would have gone.

However when God chose to make Eve from the flesh and bone of Adam, he guaranteed that there was a DNA match between the two and Eve’s descendent (the Messiah) would be able to be traced directly back to Adam before sin tainted Adam’s blood line. You can see more about this reasoning in my blog post http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2006/11/22/could-the-messiah-have-been-a-woman It is vital that the Messiah was able to trace his ancestry back to Adam, yet it is also vital that he was born without original sin. This is only possible because Eve was not charged with bringing sin into the world and her bloodline was not contaminated with inherited sin.

Thanks Rusty. Yes I think the diagrams do help to show how important the Greek word for head – kephale – is for expressing the meaning of source. In my mind there can be no other meaning for Adam as head of the human race other than source.

Yes, it is worth putting the effort into more research. There is actually a difference between the Emergent Church (with a capital ‘E’) and the emerging church movement. Much in the emerging movement is just fine and geared towards younger people who have a different mindset. The Emergent Church is quite another thing with a lukewarm approach to sin and righteousness and some of the major Christian doctrines. Bob DeWaay has a debate with one of the leaders of the Emergent church that I would like to purchase. I think it is important to hear it for myself as it is my understanding that the Emergent church leader wouldn’t commit to any doctrine as truth. It is important that we hold tight to sound doctrine and test everything by the Word of God.

Thanks for your suggestion, I will look into it further.

Welcome Molly!

I agree with your summary and I also think that we need to do more to expose the ungodly pressures that have been placed on men who have been taught that they are to be a priest over their wives. I remember as a child hearing the teaching that the husband will answer to God for whatever his wife does or doesn’t do. No wonder so many men think they need to dominate their wives. After all if they are solely responsible for their wive’s actions, shouldn’t the men rule over their wives and force them to obey? It’s sad that this attitude is still prevalent today.

I have been mulling over the idea of doing another video series, this time on the subject of marriage and headship/submission. It would deal with different perversions of God’s arrangement for marriage such as the false teaching about the husband being the priest over the wife. I haven’t seen anything in a video format that deals with exposing these false doctrines. If the Lord continues to lead me in this direction, this is something I would like to work on.