Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answers On or After: Thu 12/31/70 Author: Rabbi Mark Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Rabbi Mark, can you explain this verse? | Eph 5:33 | Rabbi Mark | 65801 | ||
5399 phobeo from 5401; to frighten, ie (pass.) to be alarmed; by anal. to be in awe of, ie. revere:--be(sore) afraid, fear (exceedingly),reverence. is the exact entry found in Strong's concordance. Not quite the idea or the words you expressed above. The definition is exactly as I stated in my previous post. I would also have you know that the word translated to be fear in the New Testament is not always Strong's 5399. In some cases it is 870, 5401, 1167, 2125, 820. I'd go into all those definitions but I don't see the point. You either made a mistake. Or you misrepresented the definition to suit your purpose. Your mistake, Searcher is that you are starting from a preconceived position that may not be accurate and you are looking for facts to support that preconceived position. You should go in with no position and seek for Truth. That is what I do. That is the only way you will ever find truth. 2 Cor 7:1, and Ephesians 5:21, Phillipians 2:12 all support my position that fear is not only expected but commanded in the New Testament. You don't think anyone should be afraid. That is what you think. What you think does not matter. Get out of what you think and into what God says. We should not fear death. We should not fear evil. We should not fear the temptor. These are things we should not fear. But there are things we should fear. We should fear God. And the wife should fear the husband. And we should do this with an awe behind it not a paranoia as I think you and others on the Forum are supposing I mean. So for the record, I am saying to fear with awe -- not with paranoia. There is a vast difference. Searcher, I'm sorry if I sound impatient. But the Forum is not taking time to think. It seems they all have preconceived notions based on some faulty theologies that they just can't stop and let go of so that they can see what I am saying. Your entry above is an example. It is horribly flawed. On purpose? I hope not. I hope you were just looking at the wrong entry and copied it incorrectly. Why am I so adamant? Because Searcher. Aren't you aware that we are responsible for leading others. That we must lead them in Truth. Not with calming words that lulls them to sleep in the face of the enemy. They are asking serious questions. The answers for which can prepare them for victory or slaughter. The devil roams about as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour. Your a scholar. Or you are attempting to be. But the theology is not what will make you wise. It will make you sound good but it will make you ineffective. The Word of God will make you wise and effecective. Get with the program. Your responsible for souls here. |
||||||
2 | Is reverence feasible? Always? . . . | Eph 5:33 | Rabbi Mark | 65616 | ||
Dear Srchng: I believe that you are right on this count. What I have denounced as a flaw should more reasonably be considered as God's perfect order of things. And this makes it all the more important for both the woman and the man to live out their respective roles as God has prescribed in His Word. Thank you for setting me straight in my perspective. You are wise. Rabbi Mark |
||||||
3 | Woman's sin worse than man's? | Eph 5:33 | Rabbi Mark | 65585 | ||
mommapbs: We should always avoid sin. I did not say that anyone should sin. It is not sin for a woman to be under the authority of a man that is bad at handling the authority. A marriage has more chance of success if the man plays his part and the woman plays hers. If the woman decides to switch roles because the man is bad at his authority then he will resent her. And she has shown contempt for him. This will never work out. Remember, the man and woman both had free choice in marrying. Now they have to settle for the flaws and imperfections the other had even before they agreed to the marriage. This is maturity. Now play the respective roles that God ordained for us ... and things will work out well. If we are not in the roles prescribed by God, then expect problems. |
||||||
4 | love...as himself (if no self-love?) | Eph 5:33 | Rabbi Mark | 65452 | ||
As a man loves himself. The love here is described that no man hates his own flesh. Meaning that he feeds himself, nourishes himself, cloths himself. This is the type of love that the passage is talking about. If the man you are talking about does this ... then this is self love. And it is the kind of love he is to have toward the woman as well. Women tend to have a romantic view of love. If a man loved himself romantically he would be a narcist. And this would be vile to the Lord. It does not refer to romantic love. But the kind of love and self respect of a man caring for his daily needs. | ||||||
5 | Why is the man the head of the home? | Eph 5:33 | Rabbi Mark | 65451 | ||
In your question, "why is man the head of the home"... you give an answer which says that no one should dominate the other in any way. Then you contradict that statement by saying the man is the head and the woman the body. When you say the man is the head this biblically means that the man is in charge. The woman is not the body. The woman is the help mate. She was made for the man. In Genesis 3:16 God said that the man shall rule over the woman. In 1 Tim 2:12-14, Paul told us God's reason for this. You can read it, but mainly it is telling us that the woman was not made as spiritually discerning as the man and this is why she fell into transgression. Yes, it is God's will for man to rule over the woman. It is God's will for the woman to fear the man. This is repeated throughout the Bible in many places and never, never contradicted or changed. I realize it does not go over well with feminism and is not politically correct to say this. It is nevertheless true. If we see Christ as our King and ruler -- we follow His laws first -- and man's law second (if they do not interfere with Christ law). | ||||||
6 | Is reverence feasible? Always? | Eph 5:33 | Rabbi Mark | 65445 | ||
You are correct in interpeting the Greek to mean phobea which imples that a wife should fear her husband exceedingly. This is consistant with Genesis 3:16 when God cursed the woman by saying, "...And thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." It was God's plan that the husband should rule over the wife. Not to her detriment. But for her protection. For spiritually the woman has a flaw which the man does not. Paul explains this in 1 Timothy 2:12-14 "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." It was easy to deceive the woman in the garden. And it is easy to deceive the woman today. But if she is obedient to her husband and her husband is obedient to God -- that woman shall not be found in another transgression. God made the woman as the man's helpmete. He made the woman for man and not the man for woman. The man is stronger than a woman physically, logically, and emotionally. The woman should fear someone physically, logically, and emotionally superior to herself. There are many instances in the Bible where God has ordained man to be over the woman. It is written in the Law of Moses. It is commanded in the New Testament. Sarah called Abraham Lord. And there are many, many more references. But there is not space here to go into them. Even if the man is bad at his authority over the woman the woman still must fear and revere the man. For if the woman took authority, which is expressly forbidden in the Bible, it would be worse than a man who was bad at handling authority. It would be Adam and Eve in the garden all over again. The devil is behind the feminist movement. And the ideology behind the ERA and womens place in society today are not according to God's Word. This is why there is such high rates of divorce and other social ills. It is also why most women cannot be happy. For they usurp the man. An in this place of authority for which God did not make them suited they are most miserable. | ||||||