Head "OF" or head "OVER" .....

[ted]

To all concerned...

Points have been made concerning quoting and plagiarism, etc, and they are noted. Please check posts to make sure all posts are either your original writings, or that due credit is given to the rightful authors.

When quoting, please cite sources and check to see if you need written permission to use the material.

At the same time, also ensure that all posts remain respectful and within the boundaries of due consideration toward maturity and good conduct.

In other words: Be nice!

Onward...

t.

[Openly Curious]

OC:Ruling and having authority over the animals of the earth is not abuse firehill it is a responsibility to care for them else they would run amuck on the face of the earth the cows have to be milked everyday and so forth it is a place of responsiblity.

Good points. We are to care for them and they are a responsibility of ours.

I don't understand what you are refering too. I didn't see the words 'rule' and 'authority' at all in EmilyAnn's post. Neither did I mention one word on 'rule' and 'authority' over animals. I only spoke on abuse. There is a difference between rule, authority and abuse.

No, you mentioned "abuse" Why don't you tell me what the difference is between the three of them then?

OC

Yes, I did mention abuse, not rule or authority.

God's rule whom has all authority is never abusive.

Then I did understand your meaning very well the first time as I saw the link you was giving between rule and abuse.

You still didn't tell me the difference between the three of them being rule, authority, and abuse. Which for the record I already know what you are trying to push her and that is men who rule over their wives are abusive husbands. That is a lie firehill that you are propagating her among us plain and simple.

But I am wondering from what you have so said just how far do you take that mindset and wonder do you believe in the Godhead at all being the Father, Son and Holy Spirit this is the trinity as I don't think you have a clue at all how the trinity is set up and works. God did put man over the animals of the earth to "rule" over them but of course not to "abuse" them

Do you not see Christ submitting His will to the Father's "RULE" when on earth do you see it as "abuse" because Jesus obey the Father's authority over Him.

OC

I didn't make a link. I gave a simple example of the difference between the three. No, not all men who rule over their wives are abusive husbands. Please, don't put words in my mouth that I've not written nor implied.

Most christians don't have a clue how the Trinity is 'set up and works.' At my request, get some control over yourself and stop the character assasination. Christ's and the father's will are one always in agreement. He learned obideince in his human nature which is something to be grasped. Enough with the false accusations already. I will not further respond to such a post from you. I'll discuss sripture though anyday.

you say you didn't make a link but in the next breath you say you gave a "simple example" of the difference between the three hhmmmmm sounds like a link to me. Why don't you stop the character assasination of God's Holy Word in twisting the scripture to what you want it to say. Because that is what I see you doing instead of wanting to come in line with it and what it truly says for us to do as men and women. I've only seen one assault after another on the Word. The Father's will is the Father's will and all else are subject to it. Christ and the Father's will are only one because Christ willingly submits to it. Our will and the Father's will are only one if we follow and obey it or else it becomes our will instead of His. We also like Christ who is our example have to "learn" obedience to the Father.

You don't seem to have any scriptures to discuss.

oc

[Openly Curious]

'firehill'

If an idea or concept is in the bible why would you fight it?

That's one for you to answer firehill

OC

[ColleenLovesMischief]

'firehill'

If an idea or concept is in the bible why would you fight it?

That's one for you to answer firehill

OC

IMHO they fight because they either can't accept the bible as truth, or just do not want to. Lets keep it nice guys.....please!

[OopsMartin]

Good morning everyone. Hope all had a restful evening. I did.

And now if we could get back on topic. From a couple things that were said early on, I'd like to deal with the concepts that the husband was given "headship" over the wife at creation. I am gathering that those who believe that think the way that was established was:

1. the male was created first which gave him priority over the female

2. because God called the woman a "helper", that indicated her role as assistant to the man

3. Gen. 3:16 says the man will rule over the woman.

I would like to keep the discussion of 3:16 until after we have discussed the issues of what happened before the fall. So if there are not any other reasons other than 1 & 2 of why anyone believes the man should be given headship because of the events at creation, let us know.

[Emily~Anne]

1 Timothy 2:13-14

13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

[apothanein kerdos]

The concept of head as "source" is well documented in both classical and Christian antiquity and has been long accepted by scholars. Some evangelicals, however, have shown a reluctance to deal with the data

[OopsMartin]

1 Timothy 2:13-14

13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

OK, so are you saying that you want to add in that because the woman was deceived and the man sinned deliberately, that is why the man was given "headship" over the woman?

I'll add that in.

[Emily~Anne]

1 Timothy 2:13-14

13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

OK, so are you saying that you want to add in that because the woman was deceived and the man sinned deliberately, that is why the man was given "headship" over the woman?

I'll add that in.

For clarification for other posters, it is in response to this:

Quoting Oopsmartin

And now if we could get back on topic. From a couple things that were said early on, I'd like to deal with the concepts that the husband was given "headship" over the wife at creation. I am gathering that those who believe that think the way that was established was:

1. the male was created first which gave him priority over the female

2. because God called the woman a "helper", that indicated her role as assistant to the man

3. Gen. 3:16 says the man will rule over the woman.

I would like to keep the discussion of 3:16 until after we have discussed the issues of what happened before the fall. So if there are not any other reasons other than 1 & 2 of why anyone believes the man should be given headship because of the events at creation, let us know.

[rtwo]

Hey, has anyone seen my dead horse? Oh, here it is.