I would like to see men take the place that God has intended for them. I don't know what the men on this list are like in their homes, except for Slade and Jeff. But I am committing myself to pray for you gentlemen that you would take your place IF you haven't and that you would be excellent examples to other men to take their place as well.
God would have spared Sodom and Gomorrah if there were only ten righteous men. I am praying that the righteous men will stand up. Suzy --- Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Amen ladies!!!!!!! Please keep this thread alive. > I'd love to 'listen in' on more. Men (we) have > 'vacated' and women (you) have had to occupy that > 'vacated' space. > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: November 17, 2004 13:37 > Subject: [TruthTalk] Gender differences > > > > > From: Susan Petersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Yeah, Judy!!!! We agree. I am exicted about this. > > jt: That's good Suzy - me too! > > Love is genderless. I also believe that women > should not teach unless there is no man that is > qualified to do so. Deborah was made a judge because > no man was qualified to fill that position. It was > supposed to be a slap in the face for the men of > that time. It was God's way of saying if you don't > step up to the plate, I'll put someone else in who > will. As for David's comments, I agree with some of > them. I do believe that men have to be more manlike. > > > jt: I would say it depends what one means by > "manlike" To me 'manlike' nothing like Mel Gibson > playing Wm Wallace or Arnold S. of CA because all > that is outward. I am drawn to inward or 'spiritual' > strength. Apparently Paul was not too impressive > outwardly and neither was Jesus according to the > prophecy of Isaiah. > > In churches you do see pastors not preaching on a > certain subject because a select few have decided > what you can preach about and what you can't. I went > to a church like that. God help anyone who dare make > someone feel convicted about something. Let's just > stick to the easy stuff and never grow to the next > level of your faith. > > jt: People pleasers and there sure are a lot of > those. Some congregations won't put up with anything > but an ear tickler. > > But I don't neccessarily agree that it is the > women who are totally responsible for men not being > more manlike. I am sure they have played a part in > that process. Why did the men not stand up? Why did > they give in to such a pressure that they allowed > themselves to be backed into a corner? And could > they have possibly be put in that corner by other > men? > > jt: They come by 'blaming the women' honestly - it > goes all the way back to the first Adam and is part > of the fallen nature of mankind in general. There > are too many women who are left with the > responsibility to be the spiritual head of their > family through no fault of their own. Some are > widowed by death or abandonment and others are > spiritual widows so these women have to take on what > God did not originally equip them for - but it > doesn't have to be a total disaster. Timothy's > mother and grandmother did a pretty good job of it. > > Paul was a manly man and he speaks of love being > gentle and kind, not jealous etc... in First > Corinthians. If men to be more manlike than they > need to start loving properly. > > jt: We agree wholeheartedly again Susan - this is > getting better and better :) ATST too many men are > wounded and need healing themselves. I've heard that > up to 90% of men in our churches have not knows the > love of a natural father. They may have had fathers > who loved them but they were so stoic that they > could not tell them that or give them a hug... this > is more fallout from generational sin. > > Please do not take this as man bashing on my part. > And I don't believe that all men suffer from the > problem that you have discussed. Suzy > > jt: I don't believe you would ever be mistaken for > a 'man basher' Suzy. I see what you are saying and > think that very few men have escaped and none of us > know how to love as we should - but we can learn... > > > > > > > From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Judy wrote: > > Being 'easily offended" happens to both men and > > women David and has > > nothing to do with feminized conversations > > and emasculated men. Do love and good manners > have > > to be genderized? > > >From whence are the roots of such > > a concept as this? > > > > If you were a man, you might understand this > better. > > To tell you the > > truth, you are more a man than many men I have > met, > > so this puts you at a > > disadvantage in considering this question. In > > talking about this to you, > > I feel kind of like someone making a point to an > > Olympic female weight > > lifter that women tend to be physically weaker > than > > men. If she is > > stronger than most men, it might not make a > whole > > lot of sense to her. > > > > jt: This morning my car quit on the highway and > so > > did our cell phone; I > > sure wasn't making like an Olympic female weight > > lifter out there. It was > > a long way back to the gas station so I prayed > for a > > good Samaritan and > > the Lord sent one - a Ditch Witch man with a > working > > cell phone who said > > he wouldn't like for his wife to be out there on > the > > highway... it's such > > a blessing when God provides. > > > > Historically, our rules of manners have come > from > > women. We invariably > > turn to the female sex for sensitivity about > > politeness and manners. > > Surely the phrase "Miss Manners" means a little > more > > than "Mr. Manners" > > to you. > > > > jt: I look more to Jesus than to Miss Manners > for > > sensitivity and > > empathy. He is the one who raised the status of > the > > women of his > > generation by allowing Mary to sit at his feet > and > > learn which was > > unheard of in Judaism - since He is our example > for > > life and godliness > > why would gender be a big deal? > > > > The problem is that when women determine the > rules > > of etiquette in > > dialogue, we get away from the kind of dialogue > that > > the apostles often > > engaged in and also taught their disciples to > > engage. The dialogue of men > > were so heated, that Paul instructed Timothy: 1 > > Timothy 2:11-12 (11) Let > > the woman learn in silence with all subjection. > (12) > > But I suffer not a > > woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the > man, > > but to be in > > silence. > > > > jt: I don't understand the above instruction in > the > > same way David. My > > understanding is that Timothy was pastoring in > > Ephesus and they had a > > problem there with a type gnosticism where the > women > > would receive all > > the revelations and they would lead the men; > this is > > also why he makes > > the point about the woman being deceived and > being > > saved through > > childbirth. > > > > Isaiah also uses gender to describe something > not > > honoring to God. Isaiah > > 3:12 (12) As for my people, children are their > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ---------- "Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
