Tom Eisendrath on "Submitting?" + my response
The following is an interesting exchange between two sisters and Tom Eisendrath on the subject of a wife's submission to her husband. My response to their discussion follows Tom's contribution.
Ron Buhler
From: Thomas Eisendrath
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 2:05 AM
Subject: Re: Marriage covenant
Brooke
Good to hear from you. I am very busy as I just got back from Jerusalem. I will have to say that it would be best if we can study this together next time I see you or maybe we can do a 3 way call with Pam. I will give you a hint of why Paul is addressing this case specific command to the Ephesians. You need to read Acts 19 and see how the church started and do a little research on the cult of Artemis or Diana, before you can understand this letter to the saints in Ephesus. You must be very careful when using a letter to establish Torah. Letters are case specific to a congregation and to understand them fully, you absolutely need to know the context and the circumstances of the letter. We don't have the benefit of knowing exactly what issues the Ephesian church were dealing with other than through the internal evidence in the letter itself and secular history so we have to make educated guesses as we study the letter.
There was a specific reason why Paul told these woman to submit to their husbands and that they were not to teach, (notice it is not a Torah command or G-d saying this. Paul says he does not permit a woman to teach a man). One of the best things you can do when reading Paul's letters is to ask "Why did he say this?" You will often understand what the problems were in each church if you just ask this question. If Paul is really making a universal Torah command not allowing woman to teach or telling women they alone have to submit to the male in this letter, he is contradicting himself in 1 Cor. 12 and Eph. 4 where he should have wrote that G-d gave men (males) the gifts of teaching, evangelism, apostleship, discerning of Spirits, ect. But the word he uses is generic word for "men" and "some". You will also notice that he does not say men are not to submit to woman, but simply that women are not to have absolute authority over a man. We can not read more into this than what is here. If you study the cult of Artemis, the female sex deity, that is mentioned in Acts chpt. 19, and then study about the cultural role women had in this region (including Collosae) it will make total sense why Paul is telling the women in these regions to submit to their husbands and not to teach. They had come out of a matriarchal cult in which woman were considered superior and dominated men as well as the occult and witchcraft. These woman were not ready to be leaders or teaching the scriptures nor were their husbands qualified to lead the church, which why Paul had to send Timothy there to pastor it. You not find Paul writing this counsel in any of His other letters, except Collossians, which is a town close by dealing with the same problems. In fact Ephesians and Collosians are almost carbon copies of each other in their subject matter and problems that Paul was dealing with.
In the Phillipi church on the other hand, the leaders were mostly woman and the church was in Lydda's house. There were not even 10 Jewish Men or a Minyan or synagogue in the city. Here the church was lead and taught by women. So we have to be very careful we how interpret Paul and neither make him say what he is not saying or contradict himself and the gospel that Yeshua and he preached. He is the most twisted and misunderstood writer of the Scriptures. Peter foretold many would make shipwreck of their faith by twisting Paul's writings.
2 Peter 3:15-17 (NLT)
3:15 And remember, the Lord is waiting so that people have time to be saved. This is just as our beloved brother Paul wrote to you with the wisdom God gave him- 16 speaking of these things in all of his letters. Some of his comments are hard to understand, and those who are ignorant and unstable have twisted his letters around to mean something quite different from what he meant, just as they do the other parts of Scripture-and the result is disaster for them. 17 I am warning you ahead of time, dear friends, so that you can watch out and not be carried away by the errors of these wicked people. I don't want you to lose your own secure footing.
Peter also writes 1 Peter 5:5 (KJV)
Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble. Here he tells all of us -men and woman to be subject one to another. No race or sex distinction is mentioned.
I pray the truth of what Messiah has done will set you free to be who He called you to be. Brook, Do you believe Messiah is going to restore all things? We are told this will happen even before he comes in Acts 3:21-23 (NLT) 3:21 For he must remain in heaven until the time for the final restoration of all things, as God promised long ago through his prophets. 22 Moses said, `The Lord your God will raise up a Prophet like me from among your own people. Listen carefully to everything he tells you.' 23 Then Moses said, `Anyone who will not listen to that Prophet will be cut off from God's people and utterly destroyed.' Does "all things" mean "all things"?
Brooke, Do you honestly believe women will be in submission forever to their husbands in the earth made new in the Kingdom of G-d? If you do, then I do not know how Messiah is restoring "all things". I also don't know how He breaks the curse of sin through His death and Resurrection. And if you don't believe that women will be subject to their husbands in the Kingdom of G-d and the earth made new then when do you think the Kingdom of G-d is? I believe its spiritual dimension is now and I will share more with you about this as it is late. For now, I will quote Yeshua in Luke 17:20-21 (NLT) 17:20 One day the Pharisees asked Jesus, "When will the Kingdom of God come?" Jesus replied, "The Kingdom of God isn't ushered in with visible signs. 21 You won't be able to say, `Here it is!' or `It's over there!' For the Kingdom of God is among you."
For us to continue to believe AD (after the death of Messiah)that women are to submit to their husbands, then we are still admitting we are in our sinful, cursed state and not appropriating the Redemption Price Yeshua paid for woman to be set free from this curse. The Kingdom of G-d is far way for such. I know this sounds radical and unorthodox in both Christianity and Judaism, but current views held about these things don't come from scripture, but from tradition and years of men usurping their power while still in their sins. The truth is radical and is not popular. John 8:23-24 (NLT) 8:23 Then he said to them, "You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not. 24 That is why I said that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am who I say I am, you will die in your sins."
John 8:32-36 (NLT) 8:32 And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." 33 "But we are descendants of Abraham," they said. "We have never been slaves to anyone on earth. What do you mean, `set free'?" 34 Jesus replied, "I assure you that everyone who sins is a slave of sin. 35 A slave is not a permanent member of the family, but a son is part of the family forever. 36 So if the Son sets you free, you will indeed be free.
If we can study sometime on the phone with you and Pam, I would be happy to.
Shalom, torahtom
----- Original Message -----
From: Brooke
To: Thomas Eisendrath
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 4:23 PM
Subject: Marriage covenant
1 Timothy 2:11- Let a woman learn in peace, fully submitted; but I do not permit a woman to teach a man or exercise authority over him, rather she is to remain at peace. for Adam was formed first, then Eve. Also, it was Adam who was deceived, but the woman, who, being deceived, became involved in transgression.
Note: The fact the deception of Eve occured before the fall. (there was no curse at the time) We are to submit to each other. However, our (men and women's)ministries are different, but equally valuable. The headship should never be compromised.
This is how we understand the role of our heavenly father.
Pam and I have prayed earnestly that you would receive this in the spirit it is intended. Only through submission through God's instructions can we resist Satan so he would flee from us.
Blessings,
Pam and Brooke
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Buhler
Sent: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 10:38:56 -0500
Subject: corrected version of response to Tom Eisendrath's "Submitting?"
Hi Tom
First, thanks for your frequent updates. I have been blessed by good material in many of them.
I’m sending this post to respond to your message to Brooke Lounsbury entitled “Submitting?”. I’m not sure where your immediate source is for the teaching you present in your message, but I know very well where the original source is. You need to know that this teaching is not just “a” doctrine of demons, but rather that it is “the” doctrine of demons, from which every other demonic doctrine oozes like putrid pus! If I was a “geek” I would arrange a serpent’s hiss as background audio and a shiny “apple” as a background visual to accompany your post to Brooke, but since my technical abilities are limited I will do what I can with words on paper, and ask the Ruach ha Kodesh for help to communicate truth. Your teaching constitutes blasphemy (Titus 2:5), a crime punishable by stoning to death in pre-Messianic Israel – you should truly thank Heaven for the grace which the Messiah’s sacrifice has made available, which gives you an opportunity to repent and clean up your act.
Reduced to its basic contention, your teaching says that someone who comes forth from another, who owes their very existence to another, who takes the name of another, and whose reason for being is to help another….need not be in submission to that “other”. Your support for this contention consists simply of an assertion that Paul’s numerous counsels in direct opposition to your teaching are “case specific” for another time and place. You suggest (in another post) that if a doctrine causes tension it is most likely a false doctrine, and then you ask Brooke if she “honestly” believes wives will be in submission to their husbands in the Kingdom of God. I will address each of these matters in the following comments.
You say that Paul’s letters dealing with husband/wife issues are “case specific”, and that we absolutely must know the context and circumstances of the letters before we can determine whether or not we need to listen to the instruction they contain. In fact, you could not be further from the truth! All we need to know is the Torah foundation upon which Paul grounds his reasoning (i.e. that woman is from man, and not man from woman [I Corinthians 11:8] – see my studies mentioned at the end of this post if you need more background on this subject) and we can readily see that his instruction is the polar opposite of case specific! It is obviously for everywhere and for all time, as applicable for us as it was for the original recipients. The submission enjoined in Scripture is positively the greatest blessing, not curse; the curse is men ruling over women whether they submit or not, whether they want that rule or not, whether the ruling men embody righteousness and truth or not….and even in those circumstances, the rule of men has proven necessary in a world of sin.
When your friend Brooke reminds you of the pre-fall Torah foundation for Paul’s instruction and proves your position to be invalid, you completely ignore her proof and contend that she is using a letter of Paul to establish Torah, when, exactly to the contrary, she is pointing out how Paul’s instruction is derived from and fully consistent with Torah. If and when you assimilate rather than ignore the Torah record of the manner and order of creation of male and female, you will see beyond the shadow of a doubt that whenever male and female function as husband and wife, and for the entire duration of that functioning, it is and will be the duty of the wife to render submission to her husband. You will also see that every female is, by her nature, to be submissive to male, the only question being, to which male? In Heaven’s plan as outlined in Torah, an unmarried female is to be submissive to her father, and is to remain submissive to her father until that submission is transferred with the father’s consent to a husband. The doctrine of demons which you teach does not pave the way for a woman’s freedom/emancipation from submission to men: on the contrary, the net effect of this teaching is to steal the submission of a wife to her husband and illicitly transfer that submission to the teacher of this doctrine. Shame on you, Tom, for openly violating the 10th word – “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife” – and the 8th word – “Thou shalt not steal” – and then adding insult to injury by representing your transgression as service to Almighty Yahuah! Were you to call me and suggest a “study” with my wife and myself as you suggested for Brooke and Pam, I would inform you that you already had all the audience you were going to get for your “study”. I would then have to tell you that unless you repented of the diabolical error you are teaching, it would ultimately result in the loss of your eternal salvation, the loss of salvation for many around you, and along the way, damage to and destruction of many homes and marriages. At the moment, you are one of those men Paul warned Timothy about, “which creep into houses and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, ever learning, and never able to come to a knowledge of the truth” (II Timothy 3:6,7). It is my sincere prayer, however, that you will take hold of the truth graciously revealed in Heaven’s gift of the Torah – which is the only accurate source of revelation and understanding regarding gender relations – so you will be able to truly live up to your “torahtom” moniker.
You state that Paul does not say men are not to submit to women, when that is exactly what Paul is saying when he explains the Torah reason why a wife is to submit to her husband. And then you totally ignore the Creator’s own unequivocal condemnation of husbands/men submitting to their wives/women – “because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife….”(Genesis 3:17) and the Creator’s crystal-clear declaration about what would certainly happen if Heaven’s order is disregarded – when “women rule….they cause to err, and destroy the way of thy paths” (Isaiah 3:12)….and by the way, there is no such thing as “equality” of male and female: either female submits to male, or male submits to female. What kind of Biblical scholarship are you involved with, Tom, when you turn a completely blind eye to the words of the Creator Himself, commenting on what was required of the first husband in his perfect, pre-sin state….simply because the words of the Creator do not jibe with your own perverted teaching! Nor has the Creator changed His mind on this matter with reference to the “spiritual dimension” Kingdom He inaugurated at His first advent – the 12 individuals He selected to be the teaching nucleus of this Kingdom were all men, whose names will ultimately be engraved on the foundations of the capitol city of that Kingdom, the New Jerusalem.
The truth of the matter is….that we got into the mess we’re in down here because a husband submitted to his wife instead of to his Head, the Creator….and the only way we can get out of this mess is through husbands fully submitting to their Head, the Messiah, and through wives fully submitting to their husbands – “as the church is subject to the Messiah, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything” (Ephesians 5:24).
You insinuate that when Peter issued his caution regarding the writings of Paul (I Peter 3:15-17), he was undoubtedly referring to Paul’s counsel on husband/wife relationships. You then quote Peter where he says “all of you be subject one to another” (I Peter 5:5) and you point out that no race or sex distinction is mentioned, but you strategically and deceitfully avoid mentioning Peter’s own detailed instruction given earlier in the same book for wives to obey and be in subjection to their own husbands (I Peter 3:1-7). Tom, it is you who’s twisting the words, not just of Paul but of Peter also, and your twisting will most certainly result in your own destruction and the destruction of those who follow your teaching.
The Scriptures are written by mature men, to mature men, giving instruction for mature men, unless otherwise indicated. Sometimes the Almighty expects you to simply understand this, as with Paul and Peter’s counsel to “submit yourselves one to another” in Ephesians 5:21 and I Peter 5:5, but sometimes He actually spells it out: for example, Exodus 20:17 – “Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s WIFE”; Deuteronomy 13:6-11 – “If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or THE WIFE OF THY BOSOM, or thy friend, which is as thy own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods….thou shalt surely kill him(her); thine hand shall be first upon him(her) to put him(her) to death….and thou shalt stone him(her) with stones, that he(she) die; because he(she) hath sought to thrust thee away from Yahuah thy Elohim….”; Matthew 23:8 – “All ye are BRETHREN”. Never in their wildest, most nightmarish imaginations would Paul or Peter ever have suspected that someone would use their instruction (“all of you be subject one to another” [I Peter 5:5] and “submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God” [Ephesians 5:21]) to support the idea that wives need not be in submission to their husbands, or that husbands should be subject to their wives. Both men, were they amongst us today, would rise up with righteous indignation and ask how anyone could be so ignorant (or deceptive) as to even suggest such things, when both of them categorically taught exactly the opposite – “wives be in subjection to your own husbands” (I Peter 3:1) and “wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands” (Ephesians 5:22). We are admonished to rightly divide the Word of Truth (II Timothy 2:15): you are wrongly dividing it when you blatantly ignore the numerous passages which contradict your erroneous supposition!
Your suggestion that if a doctrine causes tension it is probably a false doctrine….is truly incredible! This suggestion would certainly be news to our Messiah, Who said “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace but a sword….and a man’s foes shall be they of his own household” (Matthew 10:34-36), and “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple” (Luke 14:26). In reality, the precise opposite of your suggestion is the truth of the matter: if a doctrine does NOT cause tension, it is probably a false doctrine! As the old sayings go, “To be well adjusted in a sick society is really to be sick” and “if you’re taking flak, you know you’re over the target” and…“father knows best”.
You declare that after the first advent of the Messiah and the “arrival of the Kingdom”, wives no longer have a duty to submit to their husbands. Even if a wife’s submission to her husband was a “curse” brought about by sin, which it is not (as will be clearly shown shortly), you can easily demonstrate to your own satisfaction (because your own reasoning process is used) that your position is 100% incorrect! Do believing sisters still bring forth children in sorrow? Do believing brethren still eat their bread by the sweat of their face? Do thorns and thistles still grow in the gardens of believers? And do believing brothers and sisters still return to the ground from which they were taken when they come to the end of this present life? Of course, the answer is YES to all these questions….but the answer would be NO if your reasoning process was correct, which it is not. Every “curse” mentioned in these questions is just as “spiritual” as is “curse” of husband’s rule, and every one of these “curses” will remain a part of the human condition until the blessed end of this age!
You ask your friend Brooke, “Do you honestly believe that wives will be required to submit to their husbands in the Kingdom?”. Not only is your question very patronizing….but it’s also completely useless and irrelevant! What Brooke, or you, or I for that matter, feel about the duty of wives to submit to their husbands in the Kingdom has nothing whatsoever to do with Kingdom standards, as will be demonstrated shortly.
In the currently popular brand of idolatry which we call democracy (where people worship their own opinion, very much like they worshipped the work of their own hands in old-fashioned idolatry), the “leader” is someone who floats to the top because his views most closely resemble those of the amoral/immoral masses he is to govern, very much like particularly vile scum floats to the top of a pot of spoiled broth. A notable example from recent history which illustrates this principle is, of course, Bill “I didn’t have sex with that woman!” Clinton.
A kingdom, on the other hand, works in exactly the opposite fashion. By definition, normative in a kingdom is established by the will and example of the king. We see this principle in operation on the earthly plane in the experience of King Ahasuerus and his wife Vashti as recorded in Esther 1. Apparently Vashti had somewhat of an attitude problem, which led to a regrettable incident of insubordination/non-submission. Understandably, King Ahasuerus was “very wroth, and his anger burned within him” (v. 12), so he summoned his wise men to hear the matter and give counsel according to law. It is instructive to review what happened, as recorded in v. 13-22: “Then the king said to the wise men, which knew the times, (for so was the king’s manner toward all that knew law and judgment: and the next unto him Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan, the seven princes of Persia and Media which saw the king’s face, and which sat the first in the kingdom;) What shall we do unto the queen Vashti according to law, because she hath not performed the commandment of the king Ahasuerus by the chamberlains? And Memucan answered before the king and the princes, Vashti the queen hath not done wrong to the king only, but also to all the princes, and to all the people that are in all the provinces of the king Ahasuerus. For this deed of the queen shall come abroad unto all women, so that they shall despise their husbands in their eyes, when it shall be reported, The king Ahasuerus commanded Vashti the queen to be brought in before him, but she came not. Likewise shall the ladies of Persia and Media say this day unto all the king’s princes, which have heard of the deed of the queen. Thus shall there arise too much contempt and wrath. If it please the king, let there go a royal commandment from him, and let it be written among the laws of the Persians and the Medes, that it be not altered, That Vashti come no more before king Ahasuerus; and let the king give her royal estate unto another that is better than she. And when the king’s decree which he shall make shall be published throughout all his empire, (for it is great,) all the wives shall give to their husbands honour, both to great and small. And the saying pleased the king and the princes; and the king did according to the word of Memucan: for he sent letters into all the king’s provinces, into every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language, that every man should bear rule in his own house, and that it should be published according to the language of every people.”
Clearly, then, if we would like to understand normative in the Kingdom of Heaven, we need to know how things are between the Great King of that Kingdom, our Heavenly Father, and His Wife and children. Thankfully, our Messiah, the Son of the Great King, left on record a very concise and clear testimony regarding relationships in our Heavenly Father’s family, and each of us who desires entrance into His family should study this testimony very carefully: “While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? And who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother” (Matthew 12:46-50). Thank Heaven our Heavenly (grand)Mother, “Jerusalem which is above (which) is free, which is the mother of us all” (Galatians 4:26) is not a non-submissive wife! Truly it is as our Messiah taught us to pray: “Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:9,10).
We might also enquire how the Son of the Great King conducts affairs in His family. In that this Son is a real son, i.e. a son who follows in the footsteps and example of his father, we might reason that He would conduct His family affairs in the same way as His Father does. He did say, after all, that whatever He does is something He’s seen His Father do (John 5:19). We don’t have to settle for reasoning and extrapolation, however, in order to understand how the Son’s family program is carried on. We have the testimony of someone who met the Son personally, and his testimony renders any speculation unnecessary: “Wives, submit yourselves unto your husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church; and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing” (Ephesians 5:22-24).
Now that we understand the family matters of the King of the Kingdom and His Son, there remains the question of our role and duty in that Kingdom. The King’s Son (Who is a King Himself, and sits with His Father on His Father’s throne) discussed this matter when He visited Planet Earth at His first advent, and we would be well-advised to take His words seriously, and at face value: “And Yahuahshua answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: but they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection” (Luke 20:34-36) and “They brought unto him also infants, that he would touch them: but when his disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Yahuahshua called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein” (Luke 18:15-17).
So now we see that all Wives present in the Kingdom’s Royal Family are and will be in full, perfect, and complete submission to Their Husbands….and we also see (or should see) that those of US who are “counted worthy” to be a part of that blessed Kingdom/ Heavenly Family will not function as husbands or wives, but rather will be CHILDREN of our Heavenly Parents, the Messiah our Everlasting Father (Isaiah 9:6), and the Ruach ha Kodesh/Holy Spirit our Heavenly Mother, of Whom we will be “born again” (Luke 3:1-8) as the LITTLE CHILDREN of that Heavenly Family, “CHILDREN of the resurrection” (Luke 20:36).
Could these CHILDREN of the Kingdom change into more than children at some time in eternity future? There is no evidence in Scripture that such a change will ever occur, but if the Father’s omniscience ordained that such a change were to take place, and if it involved any functioning in the capacities of husband and wife, we may be certain that it would be the duty of the husbands to be in full submission to the Messiah, and that it would likewise be the duty of the wives to be in full submission to their husbands. The example of the Great King/Heavenly Father and His Son establish universal, eternal norm regarding these matters.
Truly, then, the prophesied “restoration of all things” includes first and foremost the restoration of the family as it was in the beginning, with husband in full submission to his Head, the Messiah; with wife in full submission to her head, her husband; and with children as they arrive in full submission to their parents. It is when this happens that the home becomes a little heaven on earth, because it reflects the image of Elohim/the Family of Heaven! And it is only when this happens that those involved will be “counted worthy” of graduation into the Heavenly Family, where they will all be blessed “LITTLE CHILDREN” who will know their role and place in that Family! Your tragic, pathetic ranting about those who believe today that it is the duty of a wife to submit to her husband – “in their sinful, cursed state; not appropriating the Redemption Price; will die in their sins; far away from the Kingdom of God” – is totally the reverse of reality, and in fact accurately describes yourself as a teacher of blasphemy!
A wife’s submission to her husband is not the curse given because of sin - her submission was a Creator-ordained duty from the first moment of her existence, a duty inherent in:
- her origin – brought forth from Adam, i.e. owing for her existence to Adam, just as a baby is brought forth from his/her mother (with initiation or begetting from father, of course), and owes for existence to his/her parents. The common colloquial expression for a woman – “babe” – has more truth in it than many would care to acknowledge: in fact, because of the Torah revelation on the origin of female, we can see that every wife is her husband’s “babe”, which is why she is to take his name and submit to his headship.
- her job description – helpmeet for her husband. “Let thy fountain be blessed, and rejoice with the wife of thy youth” (Proverbs 5:18). And why is SHE….HIS fountain? Because out of HER is to flow an increase of HIM, in the form of children trained to reflect HIS principles. This is HER being help meet/suited for HIM, which is why Paul says that wives will be saved by childbearing (I Timothy 2:15), i.e. by fulfilling their creation job description.
- her title – she is woman, i.e. OF or BROUGHT FORTH FROM man (Genesis 2:23).
- her physical design and function – which point will be self-evident to brethren of experience, and those brethren without experience can receive any needed further enlightenment with a quick trip to the magazine rack at any supermarket checkout counter….
It is critical to understand that the principle behind the duty of a wife to submit to her husband, is not one of some right to arbitrarily impose servitude. No, rather it is the revelation of a duty and a privilege which facilitates receipt of great blessings and gifts, even ultimately the gift of the very life of the one submitted to! Heaven’s universal and eternal principle, the very basis of Yahuah’s government and built into the very structure and function of the human family, is that where submission is a duty, the one to be submitted to receives in turn a responsibility to sustain, love, guide, and protect the one who has a duty to submit – to use the language of the insurance industry, to provide “full coverage”, which is symbolically represented by the head covering to be worn by a married woman. As Paul puts it, “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ of the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: for we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband” (Ephesians 5:23-33). It is in the arena of family relationships that the image of Elohim/the Heavenly Family is either restored or destroyed. The image of Elohim/“God” is all about relationships!
The curse, as mentioned earlier, is a change in the nature of a husband’s headship over his wife, i.e. he will rule over her with rigor if need be, whether she wants it or not, whether he is righteous or not, and whether in harmony with her desires or not. In the language of Scripture, “thy desire shall be (subject) to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” (Genesis 3:16). This change in the nature of the husband’s headship is not something arbitrary, either. Rather, it is something which is absolutely necessary for the continuation of life in a world of sin, and doubly necessary now at the end of the age, when sin has increased to epidemic proportions.
An exact parallel to the change in the nature of the husband’s headship at the fall is shown with reference to a wife’s bringing forth of children. From the moment of her creation in the perfect pre-fall world it was part of her job description to be fruitful and bring forth children, but after the fall bringing forth children would be much more frequent and onerous, or in the language of Scripture, “I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children” (Genesis 3:16). And once again, this change is something which is absolutely necessary in a world of sin, where death continually decimates the human family and can only be dealt with by multiplied conception, in spite of the hazards and sorrows of raising children surrounded by the baleful effects and influence of sin.
The “Kingdom” female you are presenting to us as some kind of higher life form, comes dressed in church clothing and looks rather sweet (“Kingdom” is a powerful NLP word, after all)….but if her church clothes are removed, she is easily and instantly identifiable by the ordinary man on the street as a garden-variety women’s libber, i.e. a liberated/ emancipated/non-submissive female. Hold on to that thought for a minute, please, as you consider the following astounding report.
Alex Jones recently interviewed film maker Aaron Russo (Prison Planet.com, January 29/2007). Over the years Aaron had developed a close personal relationship with Nick Rockefeller, who liked to chat with him about the goals of the money power “elite” who rule the world. One day Rockefeller asked Russo what he thought women’s liberation was all about. Russo said he thought it was about women’s right to work and receive equal pay as men, just as they had won the right to vote, to which Rockefeller laughingly retorted, “You’re an idiot! Let me tell you what that was about, we the Rockefellers funded that, we funded women’s lib, we’re the ones who have all the newspapers and television – the Rockefeller Foundation”. Rockefeller went on to tell Russo of two primary reasons why the “elite” bankrolled women’s lib: one, because before women’s lib the bankers couldn’t tax half the population, and two, because it allowed them to get children in school at an earlier age, enabling them to be indoctrinated into accepting the state as the primary family, breaking up the traditional family model and destroying the traditional family.
As they say, Tom, politics makes strange bedfellows….and I hope you realize by now that your “spiritual” politicking has made you some REALLY strange bedfellows! In case that fact hasn’t fully sunk in, possibly the following comment will help you to see who’s whispering in your ear as you spread your teaching: “Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of women’s rights….might as well sever all connection with the third angel’s message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other”. Ellen White, 1T 421,457 (written by a woman, at that….well, what’s Heaven going to do, when men who are called to preach unpopular truth refuse to open their mouths, or preach error instead of truth, as in your case?)
In conclusion, then, we see clearly that any teaching which denies or negates the headship of the husband or the duty of the wife to submit to her husband, is occultic and demonic in its origin, rotten to the core, and destroys the image of Elohim in the human family. Non-submission is simply a euphemism for rebellion, and rebellion against divinely-ordained headship at any level in the chain of command is as the sin of witchcraft (I Samuel 15:23). I appeal to you again, Tom, to repent of your dalliance with the enemy, to publicly withdraw your support for this doctrine of demons, and to stand with those of us who are working to restore every divine institution, not just the feast days.
For more commentary on the issues dealt with in this response please read (or re-read) some of my studies which I gave you when you visited last year, including “Open THOU Mine Eyes”, “To Practice Law or Not to Practice Law – That Is The Question!....(or is it???)”, “Did Our Messiah Flunk Engineering 101?”, and “Are You Circumcised By (to) The Beast?!?!”. The last study mentioned, which deals with demonic circumcision (the destroying or shaving off of the beard) is particularly vital – Heaven will give you much more insight on the matter under discussion when you stop destroying your Elohim-given beard and come into compliance with Yahuah’s beard commandment. As long as you persist in maintaining your effeminate appearance on the outside, your spiritual vision on the inside will be darkened, i.e. your eyes will not be opened by Yahuah to comprehend the true difference between male and female, and the implications of that difference.
You may also be a victim of sorcery bean/soybean poisoning, which may have dulled your spiritual perception regarding the issue under discussion. Because of its female hormone/phytoestrogen content, soy feminizes the thinking, behavior, and even the bodies of men, and creates estrogen dominance in women, leading to a long list of troubles including the aggressive, “assertive”, hostile, irritable behavior associated with severe PMS and difficult menopause, i.e. soy is jet fuel for feminist attitude and behavior! Soy also wreaks havoc with the thyroid leading to hypothyroidism, blocks the absorption of many minerals including calcium, zinc, and iron, disrupts enzyme systems, increases risk of several cancers, causes shrinkage of the brain and cognitive impairment, and creates many other problems as well. I’ll be mailing you a compilation I have recently published on this issue, which could help you if you are experiencing sorcery bean poisoning.
“Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him” (Leviticus 19:17).
Ron Buhler – Two-House Messianic Israelite, scribe of the Kingdom of Heaven, Bible student, pilgrim, and stranger
|
