An discussion on "Better Bibles Blog", attempting to persuade that the submission of wives is not submission to an authority.
A quote from Scripture, minus man-made chapter and verse markings:

Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. 1For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people. Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God. Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.

Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust. For this is a gracious thing, when, mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly. For what credit is it if, when you sin and are beaten for it, you endure? But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God.

For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed. For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.

Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct. Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair and the putting on of gold jewelry, or the clothing you wear— but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious. For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening. (1 Peter, end of chapter 2, beginning of chapter 3)

The very first word in chapter 3 (and this is a letter, not a chapter book) is "likewise". "Likewise, wives, be subject..."

Likewise; equally; in the same way.

In the same way as what?

We need to go back - the (man-made) section heading is titled "submission to authority". What are the examples?

Submission to the emperor, governors, masters. Why? Because Christ was our example; He suffered unjustly, but was in submission, not only to His Father, but to the civil authorities, who reviled, tortured and put Him on the cross.

Likewise, wives...

Servants, be subject to your masters, wives, be subject to your husbands.

Other places I've addressed this issue: (note) I'm in the process of fixing the links)

• "Husbands and Wives - Why?"
• "The 'Gender Stuff' - I'm single, why does it matter?"
• "Oikouros - Keeper of the Home"
• "Hupotasso - It's the Dance"
• "Titus 2 and Hupotasso"
• "How the World Sees Men"
• "Do Gender Roles Matter? A quick look at marriage"
• "A Woman's Place"
• "1 Corinthians 7:5"

nobody was hurt, everybody was rescued.

the birds like it...and people do swim out and dive.

but not us...

KitKat relayed all of the Scripture reading at mass today and it spurred a question in my mind that I've been talking with a friend about.

Okay, not question...more of a "challenge".

Define "gospel".

Is the gospel the "good news" to the lost? does it stop at baptism (confirmation, whatever)? How do you preach the gospel to the lost? to believers?

Please leave your thoughts! 😉

(I asked a friend a few days ago if she, as a Christian, knew how to give the gospel to her boyfriend. Her answer...no, not really)

I wanted to address these questions, but didn't want them to get lost in the shuffle. Thursday was a 15 hour day (work and college combined), Friday I came home and went to sleep, Saturday I did homework and housework)...

The post is here:

The first question is from Moonshadow: My question - and I doubt anyone here can answer it - is whether the Orthodox feel responsible for our departure, for letting us go.

If I remember the history right, Rome was not pushed out - they left. Not so much because of differences in doctrine (although there were a few), but because of political power. Before that split there was unity. I think of a marriage and a one-flesh covenant. If one spouse leaves the covenant, can the other truly force them to stay?

The nest is from Kelly: My question was, what do you feel should follow as far as the leadership of the church.

My answer: what is the New Testament model?

- Does the New Testament speak of an infallible teaching body? No.

- Did the word "Ekklesia" refer to a magisterium, or to a local assembly? It referred to a local assembly, or to the entire body of believers.

- When the writers of the New Testament spoke of church discipline, who were they instructing to deal with it (the local church).

- Are the specific requirements for church leadership? Yes - and Rome requires that priests and on up be unmarried, a blatantly unbiblical requirement.

The New Testament model for church leadership is

• leadership based on Biblical standards
• teaching and doctrine based on Scripture (which included the letters from the New Testament writers)
• local autonomy in reference to church discipline
• local elders are to lead by example, not by "lording it over" the flock

Here is an example of a local church led by a "plurality of elders".

A couple of interesting conversations going on on the web...on is at The Boar's Head Tavern.

When tragedy strikes, how do you minister to those affected? Is it wrong to point to the sovereignty of God?

I think it depends on a few things

• whether you're talking to a believer or an unbeliever
• how you handle the conversation with a believer depends on the maturity of the believer
• your own history of hardship

I can say that, from my own history, when I was holding my dying husband's hand; when I listened to his last breath, that it was a great comfort to me to know that my God held my future.

I took solace in the knowledge that I could see only what happens to me in this lifetime; God sees eternity. And even now, in looking back on all that has happened in my life, things work - even really bad things work - in ways that we cannot see in that moment.

It is no small thing to tell a spiritual sibling, "I don't know why this happened...but I trust that God knows."

To an unbeliever, that is nonsense.

The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

How do you explain the tragedy of the Minneapolis bridge collapse to an unbeliever? Whether you chalk it up to the sovereignty of God or not, the end message should be: Life is short. There are no guarantees. Repent and be saved.
We live in a fallen and sinful world. Mankind started out in Eden, perfectly protected. Through choice, we are now fallen.

Is there grace in this? Yes! The grace is that we are fallen and sinful creatures - and that the way out of this fallen and sinful world is found in Christ. Period.

And my official (most likely weekly or close) beverage of the day is upon us...

(my icky class of the semester is Spanish) I typically stop at Martha's on the way home from class and try a different beverage every week...since I still have a "G rated" blog, here's an image, not the text:

Founder's is a local brewery - this Scotch style ale is heavy and hoppy. I like bitters and this has it. There are other beers I prefer and I probably won't buy this one again.
Along with my other "vice", one of these: ...Spanish is enough to make me want to kick back and relax...

From our backpacking trip: a view from my tent. You can see the edge of the door.

More links to "outside" here.

(see comment from "lunes Linkage, 8/27") - the request was to address the "Top Ten Bible Verses Which Protestants Cannot Adequately Explain?"
The website that was referenced is "Scripture Catholic" - "my top ten"

The first passage(s) are Matthew 16:18-19 and Isaiah 22:22

And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

And I will place on his shoulder the key of the house of David. He shall open, and none shall shut; and he shall shut, and none shall open.

There are a couple of issues here:

1 - What did Jesus mean by these Words?

2 - What did Jesus mean by these Words?

Yes - it's the same issue, but two different twists.

1 - what did Jesus mean by these Words? - What was He saying to Peter at this time?

2 - what did Jesus mean by these Words? - Do these words that Jesus was saying to Peter at this time necessarily mean that He was giving the current pope in Rome and the Magisterium the sole authority to rule over Scripture?

Taking the consequences first, a person (or church) must prove that these words meant Rome and the Magisterium, not the entirety of the body of Christ, or not the Orthodox Church.

In an interesting article by Alex Anatole, on Rome's split from the Orthodox Church, that the church was in unity until after the first 400 years or so, at which time the bishops in Rome began lusting for more and more political power.

The Bishops of Rome (Popes) started lusting after more and more political power. Unhappy with being recognized as "first among equals" by their fellow Bishops in Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople (and also Ephesus,) the Bishops of Rome began to demand that we recognize them as the "supreme Bishop" of the whole Church.

Toward the end of the 6th century, a council of Western Bishops (under Rome) changed the Nicene Creed to read that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father AND THE SON ("Filioque" in Latin.)

We objected that this destroyed the doctrine of the Trinity by undermining the Personhood of the Holy Spirit. It made the Holy Spirit merely a force generated by the interaction of the Father and the Son.

Rome would not listen.

Their faith in the Holy Spirit began to erode, and it showed in their doctrine.

Unsure of the Holy Spirit's ability to guide the Church, Rome continued to falsely boost the centralized power of the Papacy. In time they came to believe the Pope to be infallible in matters of doctrine.

Unsure of the Holy Spirit's ability to pray with us and for us, they elevated Mary and the Saints to almost be a means of "getting around Jesus."

We objected.

Rome would not listen.

In 1054 the crisis came to a head. A Papal legate, in a fit of anger over our "refusal" to acknowledge the Pope's inflated claims and warped doctrine, excommunicated the Patriarch of Constantinople. The Patriarch then excommunicated the Pope.

Efforts were made to reconcile. But the Pope would not give up his claims to power, and we would not compromise our doctrine.

Rome went independent.

Unchecked by any kind of "peer review" by the Eastern Patriarchs, Rome's theological innovations proceeded unchecked.

Within 500 years after the Great Schism, they had become so warped that they incited a revolution - the Protestant Reformation.

*************

What happened to the other centers of Christian activity, Jerusalem, Alexandria, Antioch, and Constantinople?

We're still here, and still united in faith and doctrine.

These days we go by the name "Orthodox."

**************

Rome still retains some external customs which identify them as a former member of the Orthodox community.

But at their core, they departed from us long ago.

Taking the consequences first, it cannot be proven from Scripture that Jesus' Words to Peter meant that it was Rome (given her exit from the unity of Orthdox) that would be given authority over Scripture.

I always have...lichens, moss, fungi...some of the most interesting looking "stuff".

Here is a blog that gives us photos of all sorts of interesting things...

"Dark Roasted Blend" has a post with Moss, Lichens and Fungi. (Warning, there's a little "PG" here and there, but the vast (VAST) majority is stuff just like this...or scary roads...or vintage album covers...)