[TruthTalk] Fem. God- Dave H. get bathing suit.

[Judy Taylor]

Lance, the problem it appears is with your definition of "believer" As to the assumption below - I for one would say YES. Believers have certain fruit in their lives and it is not the kind you describe here.   From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> David:   Am I to assume that YOU would be incapable, excellent researcher that you are, of making a legitimate case FOR the maltreatment of AT LEAST those three groups I mentioned by believers? Am I to assume that, over the course of the last 20 centuries, believers have not, regularly and, over a protracted period of time, treated other believers in an ungodly/unbiblical manner? Should you actually say to the former 'yes Lance, I'm incapable of doing so' and, as to the latter 'no Lance, I as a believer never have, no member of my immediate family ever has and, no group of believers I know of ever has' then I shall do what I can to demonstrate otherwise.   From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org> Sent: February 12, 2006 15:17 Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fem. God- Dave H. get bathing suit.     > Lance, the problem is that the 'woman bashing' that you read into it is > from > a false stereotype that has been programmed into your mind from this > present > world system.  This mindset is actually a delusion, a deconstruction of > something real into something that is not real.  It is the spirit of > Anti-Christ.  This is the same problem I have preaching on campus about > homosexuality, or having a sign that says, "help prevent homosexuality." > With such a message of hope to help the homosexual, I am immediately > typecast into being a hatemonger and homophobe.  Why?  Because the bigotry > and false stereotype that has been programmed into the minds of others, > that > anybody who believes that homosexuality is immoral or preventable is > filled > with hate. > > Did you even read the context of Tertullian's message here?  Please look > it > up.  If you need me to do the homework for you and paste the text here or > provide a link, let me know. > > Please consider his context and his audience.  He was speaking to > REBELLIOUS > women, whose heart it was to alter the Creator's work upon them, by dying > their hair yellow, and wearing black eyeliner, and foundation makeup, and > braiding the hair, and wearing jewelry and ornaments, fine clothes of > purple, etc.  This is a GENDER issue.  Men generally speaking are not > prone > to spending an inordinate amount of time trying to make themselves > attractive in this way.  Why do the women do it and not the men?  There > are > several explanations.  Tertullian was giving his perspective, based in > Scripture, a passage from the book of Genesis which all seem to accept as > Scripture, and text from the book of Enoch, which Tertullian accepted as > Scripture but realized that not everybody did.  In the context in which he > spoke this, I have no problem with him speaking a reproof to women in this > way, reminding them of Eve's sin and how their deception about this > wearing > of makeup is similar.  He gave a historical backdrop, and his reason for > all > of this was not to suppress women, but to elevate them.  He was > contrasting > the condemned and cursed condition and linking the wearing of makeup to > this > with the gospel believing liberated woman, who is promised the same > dignity > of men in the resurrection, a seat from which to judge the very angels > that > taught the women to wear makeup and do other things besides.  Even if you > think his reasoning has problems, you should not misrepresent him as being > somebody who was mistreating women or as someone engaged in 'woman > bashing.' > The only way this idea has any way of flying is if it is lifted out of > context and misrepresented as you and Debbie have done by sharing these > quotes in the way that you did.  I think you do this out of ignorance, but > the problem is that you are probably even ignorant of the fact that you do > it in ignorance.  That is the problem with delusion.  You don't know that > you are actually believing a lie. > > David Miller. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org> > Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2006 8:21 AM > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fem. God- Dave H. get bathing suit. > > > IFO could read more than a little 'woman bashing' herein, David/Dean. I > don't believe that either of the two of you would as, IMO, you both adopt > a > more traditionalist understanding of the role of > men/women..husbands/wives. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dean Moore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org> > Sent: February 12, 2006 08:05 > Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fem. God- Dave H. get bathing suit. > > >> Thank you David for this. >> >> >>> [Original Message] >>> From: David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: <TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org> >>> Date: 2/11/2006 9:37:40 PM >>> Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]  Fem. God-   Dave H. get bathing suit. >>> >>> Lance wrote: >>> > And do you not know that you are an Eve? >>> > The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives >>> > in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too. >>> > You are the devil's gateway: you are the unsealer >>> > of that tree: you are the first deserter of the divine >>> > law: you are she who persuaded him whom the >>> > devil was not valiant enough to attack. You >>> > destroyed so easily God's image, man. On account >>> > of your desert - that is, death - even the Son of God >>> > had to die. ~ Tertullian, Second Century >>> >>> The context of this is from a paragraph about modesty in apparel >>> becoming >> to >>> women.  The quote stops short in that some sentences later, he concludes >>> this train of thought by saying: >>> "Accordingly these things are all the baggage of woman in her condemned >> and >>> dead state, instituted as if to swell the pomp of her funeral." >>> >>> So he was not denigrating women here.  He was establishing some >> historical >>> guidelines, expounding upon the judgment of God toward the woman which >> said, >>> "In pains and in anxieties dost thou bear (children), woman; and toward >>> thine husband (is) thy inclination, and he lords It over thee." >> Tertullian >>> quoted this passage just before the quote given by Debbie above. >> Tertullian >>> then goes on, based upon the writings of Enoch (which he holds to be >>> Scripture but recognizes that the Jews did not because they did not >>> think >>> such writings could survive the flood, but Tertullian believed Noah, >> Enoch's >>> great grandson, to have taken it with him in the ark), to argue that >> women >>> who wear mascara and jewelry and fine ornaments were taught this by the >>> angels that had sinned and come down and married women.  He points out >> that >>> these same angels are the angels that we will judge, and if we will >>> judge >>> them, what is it that women have to do with these things they brought to >> us, >>> being consumed with putting on makeup on their face, or coloring their >> hair, >>> or wearing fine jewelry.  He points out that these are things of the >> earth >>> and nothing that women of God ought to be concerned with.  Then he >>> points >>> out that the promise of judging these angels also is given to women; >>> therefore, they ought not be involved with these things that were >>> dishonoring to the Creator.  Tertullian writes: >>> >>> "For you too, (women as you are,) have the selfsame angelic nature >> promised >>> as your reward, the selfsame sex as men: the selfsame advancement to the >>> dignity of judging, does (the Lord) promise you." >>> >>> Such a statement is along the lines of there being no male or female in >> the >>> eyes of God.  It is an empowering statement, that women will be made >> judges >>> of angels on an equal level with men, so the quote taken out of context >> to >>> make Tertullian look like a woman basher is erroneous.  Debbie would be >> wise >>> to hear the end of his conversation. >>> >>> David Miller. >>> >>> ---------- >>> "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. >> >> >> >> ---------- >> "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. >> > > > ---------- > "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. > > ---------- > "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. >     ---------- "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.