Vision Forum Ministries: Men & Women: Spheres of Dominion

[Deleted12]

12. While men are called to public spheres of dominion beyond the home, their dominion begins within the home, and a man’s qualification to lead and ability to lead well in the public square is based upon his prior success in ruling his household. (Mal. 4:6; Eph. 6:4; 1 Tim. 3:5)

13. Since the woman was created as a helper to her husband, as the bearer of children, and as a “keeper at home,†the God-ordained and proper sphere of dominion for a wife is the household and that which is connected with the home, although her domestic calling, as a representative of and helper to her husband, may well involve activity in the marketplace and larger community. (Gen. 2:18ff.; Prov. 31:10-31; Tit. 2:4-5)

14. While unmarried women may have more flexibility in applying the principle that women were created for a domestic calling, it is not the ordinary and fitting role of women to work alongside men as their functional equals in public spheres of dominion (industry, commerce, civil government, the military, etc.). The exceptional circumstance (singleness) ought not redefine the ordinary, God-ordained social roles of men and women as created. (Gen. 2:18ff.; Josh. 1:14; Jdg. 4; Acts 16:14)

http://www.visionforumministries.org/ho ... archy.aspx

[fundiefan]

Total and complete crap.

[thoughtful]

Insane.

I'm in an "exceptional circumstance?"

Funny, we're all born single -- at what age does it become exceptional? Eighteen? Twenty-five?

[DamnPrecious]

Haha, this dumbass hasn't met my husband. He can't even rule the dog.

[Lostie]

Fantastic, I always wanted to be exceptional. Hmm, I wonder if you can get scholarships for that? I'm single so I'm an exceptional circumstance, please give me money :lol: . Seriously, the man is so daft.

[Pond]

For a moment there, I thought this was going to be a post about some weird fundie BDSM article :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

it is not the ordinary and fitting role of women to work alongside men as their functional equals in public spheres of dominion (industry, commerce, civil government, the military, etc.).

How would he know? Has he ever worked at any of those fields?? No! The guy's talking out of his ass.

[jenny_islander]

12. While men are called to public spheres of dominion Why dominion? Why not just work? Why is dominating something so important? beyond the home, Says who? I can't recall any place where God said that only men could rule over others, fight in wars, run businesses, cut grain in the fields, or tell men what to do. The Bible is full of women doing exactly that. their dominion begins within the home, and a man’s qualification to lead and ability to lead well in the public square is based upon his prior success in ruling his household. (Mal. 4:6 "He will reconcile parents to their children and children to their parents, lest I come and put the land under a ban to destroy it." This is the last line of a prophecy about the return of Elijah. Who do the writers of this stuff think they are?

Eph. 6:4 "Fathers, do not goad your children to resentment, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord." The translation they are more comfortable with probably says "nurture and admonition." Not one word about rule.

1 Tim. 3:5 " . . . for if a man does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take charge of a congregation of God's people?" Sentence fragment from the middle of a passage about the qualifications to become a bishop.

13. Since the woman was created as a helper to her husband, The exact word is ezer, which is used elsewhere in the Bible to form the names of kings and even to describe God. If in this verse it specifically means that women are only adjuncts to men, why does it mean something different when used to describe Kings or the King of Kings? the bearer of children, and as a “keeper at home,†Better translation: Manager of her household. the God-ordained and proper sphere of dominion for a wife is the household and that which is connected with the home, although her domestic calling, as a representative of and helper to her husband, may well involve activity in the marketplace and larger community. (Gen. 2:18ff.; Prov. 31:10-31; Tit. 2:4-5)

In order: The Genesis passage ordains a woman as the ezer to a man, further as an ezer kenegdo, a helper-counterpart--this is the passage taken from the KJV and used to create the modern coinage "helpmeet." The first woman is created because the first man is alone. If he just wants something to order around, then he has donkeys, horses, camels, dogs, etc., etc. If a woman is just another thing for him to order around, then he's still alone. If she's the helper to him (David uses the same word to describe God's relationship with him) and also his counterpart, he is no longer alone. This passage does not describe the part and counterpart of "spheres of dominion." God points out that the Fall has distorted human life such that Adam breaks his back trying to get food and Eve cannot rejoice at the birth of children due to the hardships they will face. This is a description of sickness, not a prescription for living.

Proverbs 31: 10-31, as a wise woman once pointed out to me, is a poem addressed to men that explicitly admits that no one person can do it all ("A perfect wife who can find?"). It's an ideal for a man to seek--note that it comes right after "Sayings of King Lemuel of Massa, which his mother taught him," which boil down to "Quit helling around and do your job as king, and by the way stop it with the concubines and prostitutes already." And the woman in the poem does not do what she does in order to seek a man's approval; she does it because she fears the Lord (v.30). Not once does she look to a man for direction--she is listening to God. Note also that the writers of these guidelines are reading back into Scripture a modern distinction between a home sphere that has no economic function or power beyond what a man may allow it and the rest of life, where men handle the money and make the decisions. This division is no older than the Industrial Age.

This brings us to Titus 2: 4-5. These verses are extracted from a letter Paul wrote to Titus, a friend who was advising the church in Crete. He appears to have been having some trouble--Paul refers to "foolish speculations, genealogies, quarrels, and controversies over the law." Paul outlines the conduct expected of Christians. "The older men should be sober, dignified, and temperate, sound in faith, love, and fortitude. The older women, similarly, should be reverent in their demeanor, not scandalmongers or slaves to excessive drinking; they must set a high standard, (v.4 starts here) and so teach the younger women to be loving wives and mothers, to be temperate, chaste, busy at home, and kind, respecting the authority of their husbands. Then the gospel will not be brought into disrepute." Note that Paul expects women to teach other women what it means to be a Christian "wife and mother." Not men!

14. While unmarried women may have more flexibility in applying the principle that women were created for a domestic calling, Again, the domestic calling outlined in Scripture is not the one the people who write this stuff assume it is. it is not the ordinary and fitting role of women to work alongside men as their functional equals in public spheres of dominion (industry, commerce, civil government, the military, etc.). Deborah, Ruth, Lydia, Jael, Judith, need I go on? Turning to history, women have always worked as hard as men and often harder, except in the upper classes and the socially ambitious classes just below them. Victorian women were hard-rock miners. Medieval women were shopkeepers, weavers, even blacksmiths. Victorian men, who published most of the books about womanliness, preferred not to think about it. The exceptional circumstance (singleness) *cough* Paul's recommendations about marriage *cough* ought not redefine the ordinary, God-ordained social roles of men and women as created. (Gen. 2:18ff.; Josh. 1:14; Jdg. 4; Acts 16:14)

Joshua 1:14 is extracted from Joshua's instructions to his officers just before the conquest of the Promised Land. In that particular battle, "Your wives and your dependents" are expected to stay east of the Jordan. And so? This means that no woman may fight ever?

Judges 4 tells the story of Deborah, who directed Barak's battle plans but warned him ahead of time that he wasn't going to get the glory of defeating Sisera because a woman was going to do it. And onward, to the story of Jael and the tent peg. This shows that women can't have anything to do with military endeavors, how? And I notice that the song of victory that follows in Judges 5 is not discussed--the one in which Deborah is called to take action and Jael is "blest above all women in the tents."

Acts 16:14 is in the midst of the passage about Lydia. Lydia owns a business that sells "purple fabric," an expensive high-class item. Lydia is already "a worshipper of God." At the prompting of the Lord (not Paul), Lydia "was baptized, and her household with her." Lydia then insists that Paul stay at her house. So much for the little woman in her domestic sphere under the rule of a man.

[thoughtful]

Oh, jenny_islander, stop being so logical and knowledgeable about the Bible -- you're messing up their whole plan!

:lol: