God head of Christ? Husband head of wife?

[Artfuldodger]

I was thinking about how society changes what scripture means or maybe over time we learn better what scripture means.
Folks are quick to say that scripture never changes as how it relates to homosexuality but what about using that same logic for "headship?"

1 Corinthians 11:3
But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

 

[Artfuldodger]

Headship? That's a pretty strong word. Being the head of something else. It sounds like authority to me but maybe it's not. Maybe that's what we have learned over time or maybe just use it as a justification to pacify wives.
To make God the Father being the head of Christ work perhaps we have to use the same justification to make the husband and wife relationship work.

We do live in a time of equality even though Paul didn't. Society has changed this concept and for the most part, we have all accepted the change.
Except for maybe the Pentecostal Denomination and the Catholic Church.

 

[Artfuldodger]

The head of Christ is God. Marriage is given from God to man for us to visualize this concept. The head of the wife is the husband.

Maybe in most relationships there needs to be that one person who is the head over the other. The boss over the workers. The Scout leader.
The club president. The executator of a will. A king or president.
A husband, a God. A Christ, a Church.

Seems like things just work better with that order. It's not that it's an outdated way or logic. I'm not sure why God chose to make it a masculine vs feminine ideal, yet we know he did. God made man first. God had an only son, not a daughter. The firstborn male, etc. God's plan, not man's.

We can't change or white wash God's logic or reasoning for choosing man over woman.

It was His order. He made Man first. That meant man was made in His image first. Then he made man a helpmate or partner.

This a mirror of God being the head of Christ.

 

[Artfuldodger]

God's order as explained by Paul. Even though as far as salvation is concerned there is no longer Jew or Gentile, male or female, we still have Jews and Gentiles, males and females. Differences?

Should we assume God wants us to stay different?

1 Corinthians 11:5
But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head--it is the same as having her head shaved.

7 A man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.

Interesting that Paul is showing that order. Man being made in the image and glory of God, but woman being in the glory of man.

This concept has been changed by society to make equality of the sexes an acceptable reality.

8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man;

Thus showing the logic and reasoning of man being the head of woman.

9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.
10 That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.

Headship!

Eph. 5:23-24 “23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything.”

 

[Artfuldodger]

Then Paul does show that man and woman are not independent of each other. Eve came from Adam but after that, man came from woman.

Still though Paul teaches the role differences within the Church, and at home, between man and woman.
Society has removed these differences. Most have justified the changes, yet when one tries to justify the homosexuality changes, it's all wrong.

It's like it's OK to change and justify scripture we want to, as society changes, and yet with other scripture it's not OK.

At least not yet. Maybe in 10 years though. Yet scripture never changes.

 

[Israel]

If we forget from whom God made woman, for it is not that it is not of utmost note, we would easily fall into our own judgments of importance and primacy as judging, as it were, among different things. But are they? Is it?

What if a significant matter in the revelation of Jesus Christ is more significant than we yet apprehend...and that of unity?

That all of purpose in service to the revelation of this unity is already accomplished in Christ to our discovery? For our discovery? Surely as it benefits ourselves in revelation, and as all is gift in Christ for and to the body, any apprehension would no less be to the benefit of all.

Rather than thinking in terms of what place does man (or I, as man) hold over woman...might we consider rather...what place is made in me for the woman?

To see her as "other" must lead to my dealing with her as "other". But I am not convinced this is the Lord's way, at all. Can there be, might there be...so much more in these things of relating, in the hows and even perhaps whys of it, waiting to be seen? Or, patiently in reserve to be revealed?

"I" can only look to my head...for revelation and understanding. And in such looking "above" if one must see it that way (and I do not deny its usefulness to understanding) I am pressed to Christ. But, another thing is no less working...(just as He has said! and promised!) I begin to see His head! I cannot look to Him...and not see so! In looking to Christ...I no less see the Father (ahhh the inexpressable glory of His words "I go to my Father and your Father!")

Where, once in some darkness of mind I sought to know, thought to know them distinctly, as one as "other" to the "other"...something has happened, and I cannot explain its "when" happening...or explain much of its "how" of happening...except that now I see...it is just as Jesus has said. I cannot look to Christ, and then look in some other "way" to see the Father! As much as He (the Father) is in Christ...Christ is no less in the Father. There is no further focus required to a thing more distant or above, no "I will look at Him...then look...at Him". The marvel of it is so far beyond anything I might say except this...Jesus Christ is true...He will show us the Father! And...the Father shows...the Son!

And so, in this, I submit myself to a consideration. Do I bare gaze into myself, no less...either "from above" or from "beneath" (from my woman) in which, from either view she is perceived as "other"? Oh, make no mistake, my weakness is great...for I know I have approached "above" with "the woman you gave me!". Thanks be to God for mercy toward the ignorant! But this mercy comes not without a telling of pain inflicted, a sorrow placed upon another's soul.

For...my wife's nobility in a faith confessing her confidence in my loving her, I cannot deny has been rendered to one so undeserving (of her's) or any confidence whatsoever that I begin to understand:

For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband?

I could go on, but need I?


Suffice it to say the "myself" against which all is measured and seen as other, will either hold this primacy to all grief...or there will be a submission to the truth of a thing I have seen in Christ...that this self must become the "other" to me...the stranger one, the one held to the safe distance spoken of by the Lord...to hate...or else there be nothing but a laying up of shame and judgement...and unbearable grief.