Women Keeping Silence: What I Believe

•09/29/2019 • Leave a Comment

There is little doubt the idea of women keeping silence in the church is one of the most debated, controversial topics in all of the Bible in general, and of Paul’s writings in particular. Views and interpretations range far and wide. Minds are rarely changed, but it does happen. In this post, I am not so much looking to change anyone’s mind (although, hey, if I succeed, that’s great!); rather, what I hope to do is to communicate, in written form, what I personally believe about the subject. And as far as what I “believe” means, I mean what I communicate with my family, that is, my wife, and our children, especially our daughter.

Therefore, without further ado, if you are at all interested in reading, I present below what I believe to be a fair, balanced, and accurate understanding of just what Paul was after in regards to the Corinthians when he penned so many centuries ago, that women must remain “silent“.

Peace and God bless,

The Votive Soul

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

The first thing to note is that in Greek, there are not two different words for either man and husband, or woman and wife. As it pertains here, “Let your women…” can just as easily, and perhaps more accurately, be translated as “Let your wives…”. You can see this at the following link:

https://biblehub.com/greek/1135.htm

The context must be the determining factor, as since, in the very next verse, it speaks of asking husbands at home.

So, wives must “keep silence“. Now, what does this mean? If you look at this link:

https://biblehub.com/greek/4601.htm

you can see a range of meanings, more than just being silent. It also means to “hold one’s peace” and to be “kept secret“.

I submit that holding one’s peace is the right way to understand the passage. Holding one’s peace means to not lose control over one’s tongue, to know when to refrain from speaking, so that peaceful relations can be maintained (think James 3:8). Remember the context. In 1 Corinthians 14, right before this verse, Paul gave a pretty thorough summary of how certain gifts of the Holy Spirit should operate, particularly prophecy and diverse kinds of tongues with interpretation. The adjoining verses previous to 34 speak of the following:

1.) Allowing two to three prophets in the meeting speak.

2.) Letting others then judge what they have said.

3.) If something prophetic is revealed to someone else, the prophet who is speaking is to “hold his peace” so that the other person may interject their revelation. This holding of the prophet’s peace is from the same Greek word as keeping silent in verse 34. So, even men, prophets no less, are enjoined to “keep silence“, as it were, the same as the women/wives of the church.

4.) Allowing all that are present an opportunity to prophesy one by one so that everyone may learn and be comforted. All that are present includes women, since 1 Corinthians 11:5 grants women the right to pray and prophesy in the church, provided they are properly “covered” or “veiled“, as it were.

5.) The spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets, meaning even prophets or those prophesying can control themselves, hold their peace, choose when to speak, and when to refrain, not speak over someone, vie for attention, shout someone down, and etc.

6.) God is not the author of confusion, but of peace (that is, if properly obeyed, God can and will help everyone correctly hold their peace, and not lose control of themselves, men and women both, in every church everywhere).

It is into that context that Paul writes about women/wives holding their peace. When he writes stating they are not permitted to speak, it’s in this sense. If a woman or wife is going to lose control of herself, endanger the peace, add confusion, or etc., by not being in submission/subjection to her husband, then she must, to put it bluntly, shut up. Particularly when a prophet is speaking, particularly when she doesn’t understand what has been said by that prophet.

It doesn’t mean she can’t even say “hi” or “Praise the Lord” in worship, or pray when the saints pray. Rather, she can and should pray, and she can and should prophesy, as the Spirit allows, in the decency and order God ordains. Remember what prophesying is: it edifies, exhorts, and comforts. It doesn’t teach or indoctrinate (1 Corinthians 14:3). If a woman/wife is going to attempt to do that, it must only be under her husband’s permission, and only among other women and with children, lest 1 Timothy 2:11 be violated.

Going further, remember that Corinth began as a synagogue, among Jews. The law of the synagogue regarding the mechitzah requires that men and women be separated.*

See here: https://www.myjewishlearning.com/art…the-synagogue/

It is likely this is what Paul meant when he referred to “law” in verse 34. There is no actual law in all of the Torah that states a woman or wife cannot speak, that is, that not talking during religious rituals is the means whereby a woman or wife proves she is under obedience to her husband.

So, imagine a scenario in which a wife, who is separated from her husband by a mechitzah, who is tending to the children, while a prophet is speaking to the church, suddenly interrupts to call over to her husband because she doesn’t understand something and wants her husband to explain it to her.

That would be out of order. She needs to hold her peace and ask her husband at home. If a woman/wife has missed something important, likely because she was tending their children, or helping with the meal, or for any other reason, that would otherwise bless, edify, exhort, or comfort her, it is the husband’s job, at home, to share what was said, what was missed, or not understood, and explain it to the woman/wife, and thus, she gets fed what the Spirit was saying through the prophet, just at a later time, that is, at home, away from the meeting, through her head, that is, her husband.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

* An important historical factor is also at play here. Even though the Temple of God at Jerusalem was still standing when Paul wrote this letter, by the time of the 1st century, local, municipal synagogues more so than the Temple, were the main hubs and centers of Jewish spirituality. Nonetheless, various laws and regulations that governed the Temple were also implemented into local, municipal synagogues. For example, the Temple had four different courts, the first was the Court of the Priests, the second the Court of Israel, the third the Court of Women, and the fourth the Court of Gentiles.

See: http://templemountlocation.com/herodTempleCourts2.html

In a similar pattern, local, municipal synagogues followed suit, in that men were separated from women, and Gentiles, while permitted, were separated from everyone else. In this way, during a meeting, men gathered near the center, the leaders of the synagogue, like priests in the temple, usually held center stage, while women sat behind and apart from the men, often behind a mechitzah, and Gentiles at the far edges of the auditorium, just like at the Temple. In these meetings, only men were allowed to read, speak, discuss, dissent, and ask questions. Women all learned in silence and did not participate. It is clear then, that Paul is not offering anything new, but rather is enforcing the “law” of the synagogue, such as he and all of Judea and the Diaspora of Israel knew it.

Dating The Apocalypse

•05/15/2018 • 2 Comments

There is a lot of debate regarding when the book of Revelation was written. Many scholars believe it was written around the time/during the reign of the Roman Emperor Domitian, which occurred between A. D. 81 to A. D. 96. Others, however, do not agree. Many if not most preterists, for example, believe it was written before Jerusalem and her temple were destroyed by Rome in 70 A. D.

Personally, I am of the opinion that the Apocalypse was in fact written during the reign of Emperor Domitian. This short blog will explain why. Read on, if you will, Dear Reader:

A piece of numismatic (coin-based) evidence from the time of Domitian goes a long way, in my view, of dating the Apocalypse.

See here:

The coin seen above depicts Emperor Domitian’s wife, Empress Domitia, on the face, with an engraving of their son, on the reverse, who died in early childhood, holding seven stars above himself while sitting over or upon, the earth.

The Latin phrasing is as follows:

On the face, it reads “DOMITIAAVGVSTAIMPDOMIT

On the reverse, it reads “DIVVSCAESARIMPDOMITIANIF

Essentially, Emperor Domitian had the coin struck then minted to commemorate the death of his son, whom he had deified by calling himself “Divine Caesar”. Additionally, Emperor Domitian took the title “Dominus et Deus“, meaning “Lord and God“.

And so, for his, that is, Domitian’s son, to be likewise deified, it made Domitian’s son the son of the “Lord and God“.

Now, compare this to Revelation 1:16

And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

And, also Revelation 2:1

Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks…

Then, finally, Revelation 2:18

And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass…

It seems pretty clear that at the very least, chapters 1 & 2 of the Apocalypse were written after this coin was struck as a response to Emperor Domitian’s claim to Deity, and to the apotheosis of his deceased son.

It would seem the author wanted to make the point that it was neither the Emperor Domitian or his son, who is Lord God (See and compare Revelation 1:8 in the NASB) and Son of God, respectively. Rather, it is God the Father and Jesus of Nazareth, who ought to bare these titles.

Hence, if these things are so, the dating of the Apocalypse has to be given as some time after the coin was minted and circulated. This occurred in circa 82-83 A. D.. And Emperor Domitian was assassinated in 96 A. D. That gives us a window of about 12 or so years.

While there is perhaps enough disparate elements and evidence to argued over regarding the dating of the Apocalypse, the numismatic evidence seems clear enough.

The Votive Soul

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PS. For more on the relationship between the numismatic evidence and the Apocalypse, with some important information about Emperor Domitian, see: https://plymouthbrethren.wordpress.com/2008/02/01/coins-and-the-book-of-revelation-gordon-franz/

Don’t Quit!

•03/19/2018 • 4 Comments

1 John 3:4,

4. Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

In the Holy Scriptures, particularly the Scriptures of the Old Testament, but also in the New, that which is clearly demarcated as “sin”, in our world, would be more easily recognizable as “crime”.

Take a look for yourself some day. In the Law and Prophets, but also in the Psalms, the Scriptures show that things like bribery, extortion, perjury, theft, rape, murder, attempted murder, slander and libel, misappropriation of funds, unequal weights and measures to gain advantage, baiting and switching in business, manipulating the system to oppress and injure the under-privileged or marginalized population, and finally, turning a blind eye to all these crimes (and more not listed!) are sins that God detests.

So, when John writes that sin is the transgression of the law, it is important to think in terms of criminal behavior. We have to first, see how our sins are really crimes, and then see how our crimes affect the larger community of people around us, whether inside our families, our churches, our workplaces, our hometowns, our nations, and/or even our world.

In the end of all things, for so many of the human race, the last words all these lost souls are going to hear is “Depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness” (Matthew 7:23 NKJV), which is just another way of calling these doomed “sinners” criminals.

When Jesus said He came to fulfill the law (Matthew 5:17), it wasn’t just mere moral or cultic laws of the people of God and of His temple and its priesthood. It was also the full standard of all that God’s holiness and righteousness demands in order to satisfy the wrath and death sentence for all people for all times in all places against the cumulative sin debt of the entire human race.

In order to fulfill such a law, Christ had to live above transgressing, or sinning, against the Father, by failing to keep God’s laws. When we are in solidarity with the Messiah, and have our spiritual identity in Him by faith and active belief, we too, must fulfill the same law as Christ by living above such transgressions, or sins, against the Father.

Thank you, God, for presenting us with the Holy Spirit, that we may be empowered to do just that!

Saints and brethren, let your faith continually come through hearing, even as you let your hearing come entirely, and exclusively, from the Word of God (Romans 10:17).

There is no sin in your life that you cannot overcome, for this is your faith:

1 John 5:4,

4. For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.

Crimes against God and His laws do not have the right to reign in your mortal bodies as long as you refuse to submit yourself to them. Whom the Son has made free is free indeed, and that freedom, friends, is the freedom from sin (Romans 6:12).

John 8:34-36,

34. Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
35. And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.
36. If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

Since the Son of God abides forever, you no longer have to be a servant of sin forever, but rather, you can be free from your service to the flesh and the works therefore, forever.

Through the Holy Spirit and It granting you ever increasing Christ-likeness, you can begin to sin less and sin less and less and less until…? You guessed it! You can sin less and less until you are sinless.

1 John 1:5-10,

5. This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.
6. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
7. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
8. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Proverbs 28:13,

13. He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.

There is nothing but the deception locked up in your souls that says you have to forever remain a sinner who can’t help but walk in darkness and sin everyday of your life. You can today, right this very moment, confess your sin and FORSAKE IT, and find mercy.

The way only seems strait and the gate only seems narrow to those who prefer the broad way and the wide open gate (Matthew 7:14). But to those who find the eternal life promised to all through our Lord Jesus Christ, it is like as when Jacob first saw Rachel and worked fourteen long years for her hand in marriage, but found those years to be as nothing, for the prize of earning his bride (Genesis 29).

What about us? Are we sick and tired of toiling away for the King of kings, complaining that He’s making us wait too long for the prize we first desired as we laid spiritual eyes upon it back when we first believed?

No, my brothers and sisters! Let us not grow weary, but renew ourselves and continue to run and not give up! The very next breath you take is proof of another opportunity to subject yourself to the Law-Giver, to yield to His commands, to leave your life of “crime” behind, and find eternal rest for your soul, just as Jesus found eternal rest for His soul when He died on the cross.

So what I say to one I say to all:

DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT! DON’T QUIT!

Pornication’s Dirty Little Secret: Addendum

•11/13/2017 • Leave a Comment

In college, for a class called English 370: Advanced Literature, I wrote a paper called Spiritual Ramifications and Explanations for Pornography. In the class, we had four different topics of discussion, and we had to read various forms of literature and then write essays about the topics using the assigned readings (plus other sources).

I re-read that paper (written in 2009) and it reminded me of an earlier Votive Soul blog I had written called Pornication’s Dirty Little Secret. So, after re-reading my college essay, I went back and read the blog post. In re-reading the blog post, I felt inspired to write an addendum. So here it is.

Be forewarned. I am going to delve into a highly uncomfortable topic that most people would never want to talk about openly. So, if you want to continue reading, do the following:

  • Take a deep breath
  • Prepare yourself to be mature about this addendum
  • Pray if you need to
  • Read on

Specifically, in this addendum, I am going to address the sin (yes, I wrote SIN) of masturbation. Uncomfortable yet? Well, don’t be. I won’t be overly graphic or inconsiderate (but I will be direct and honest). Nevertheless, some things need to be said. First, a definition.

Let us define masturbation as: auto-erotic manipulation of the genitalia culminating in sexual gratification (ostensibly an orgasm).

The key to the definition above is the prefix “auto”. Don’t think cars. Rather, think the Greek word for “self”. In this way, an automobile is a “self-moving” vehicle, or, to say it another way, it is not dependent upon an external force to cause it’s motion.

The same with masturbation. It is done by the self to the self for the self. But is it a sin? Yes, as I will show.

Matthew 5:27-28,

Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Let us first realize the principle of the matter. Christ was not saying that women are allowed to look upon a man with lust, or that someone of one gender is allowed to look upon another person of the same gender with lust. It is a universal principle. Looking on another person in any way, if that person is not your Biblical and legal spouse, is a sin. Thou shalt not do it!

And, in case it wasn’t obvious, many, perhaps even most acts of masturbation involve a visual stimulant to arouse the perpetrator. Either an actual item like a video, a DVD, or a magazine is used, or a mental image in the mind is generated, either of a real person or a fake ideal. All are visual, meaning, something, whether external (pornographic materials) or internal (personal fantasies) are being “looked upon” to stir up lustful thoughts in order to capitalize upon them in the act.

1 Corinthians 7:1-5,

Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

Read this passage carefully. Look for the little details. Notice the context, that is, what it’s about. First, it’s about two people not “touching” each other (verse 1), where “to touch” is the Greek verb haptesthai, meaning to fasten one’s self to another. Haptesthai is in the middle voice (i.e. the action of the verb both redounds unto the actor, i.e. the self, while at the same time, is directed at the the one being touched) of the verb haptomai, meaning “to modify or change by touching/touching that influences” or touching someone in such a way as to influence or bring about change in another person, what HELPS Word-Studies describes as “impact touching[1].

So what’s Paul getting at? Clearly the idea Paul is trying to get across is a form of sensual touching that arouses the body and the genitalia and influences the person toward sexual desire, culminating, of course, in the act itself.[2] So that’s first. People in the church shouldn’t be touching each other in such sensual ways. Only Biblically and legally married people should experience this kind of touching.

The second context was already mentioned: to avoid fornication. We know fornication, or rather, pornication[3], is a sin worthy of God’s judgment in the second death (See for example, Romans 1:29-32, 1 Corinthians 6:9, Galatians 5:19-21, Hebrews 13:4, Revelation 21:8 and Revelation 22:15). Interestingly, the word “avoid” is the Greek preposition dia, and it means the channel of the act, i.e. the means whereby something is accomplished, best translated as “through“.[4]

So, what Paul means in 7:2 is that it’s important that two people, obviously a man and woman only, who love each other and want to express that love through marriage—yes, even physically—must in fact, get married, or else fall into sin and lose their salvation “through fornication“. Said another way, Biblical marriage is the means whereby fornication can be by-passed so that the husband and wife can experience sanctified consummation.

Here’s where masturbation comes in. We know the topic is marriage and avoiding fornication through improper touch (even of self, as I am attempting to show). Now note verse 3. The long phrase “render unto the wife due benevolence” basically means, give to the wife her rights to sexual intercourse, i.e. conjugal rights. And likewise the wife to the husband.

But notice what it does not say to do in order to avoid fornication! It does not say “to avoid fornication (i.e. all Biblically illicit sexual activity), sexually gratify yourself through auto-erotic acts of masturbation“. See, some people think that as long as they aren’t actually engaging in coitus with another person, they aren’t committing fornication. That’s simply not true. The only permissible sex acts in the Bible are those that are experienced BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE, one husband, one wife, as they render unto each other “due benevolence “, in purity, not perversity.

Look closely at the text. See the following indicators:

  • To avoid fornication, people should not touch each other, or themselves, inappropriately (i.e. in any way that arouses lust)
  • To avoid fornication, men and women need to marry
  • To avoid fornication, the man needs to meets his wife’s sexual needs
  • To avoid fornication, the woman needs to meet her husband’s sexual needs
  • To avoid fornication, the wife must realize that she doesn’t have any rights to her own body
  • To avoid fornication, the husband must realize that he doesn’t have any rights to his own body
  • To avoid fornication, the husband and wife must not “defraud” each other (i.e. must not deprive each other)[5]
  • To avoid fornication, the husband and the wife may mutually agree for spiritual reasons, to not engage in sexual activity with each other (for example, to fast)

Where does masturbation fit into any of that? Since masturbation is an act of the self to the self for the self, marriage doesn’t fit into the equation. So, in order for a person to masturbate, they automatically have to commit fornication with their self in order to accomplish the act.

Second, spouses are supposed to meet each other’s needs, not meet their own needs by themselves.

Third, spouses have to recognize that they have no sexual autonomy over their own bodies, meaning that they have no right to perform upon themselves any sexual activity in which the spouse is not involved. Therefore, even masturbation within marriage is a sin, even if there is not an accompanying fantasy or image, or if the fantasy or image is of the spouse.

Fourth, spouses aren’t allowed to deprive each other of their sexual needs, meaning neither a husband or a wife is allowed to have a sexual experience apart from the spouse.

And last of all, if a married couple agrees to abstain from having sex with each other for a time for spiritual reasons, no where is it allowed that they can have a sexual experience with themselves through masturbation until the duration of the agreement comes to a close.

But some will argue that the marriage bed is undefiled, meaning anything goes between the husband and wife, as long as it’s agreed upon. Not so. Look again at Hebrews 13:4.

Hebrew 13:4,

Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.

An unmarried person, even if a member of a church, who masturbates, is a whoremonger, that is, they are committing an act of self-pornication. A married person, even if a member of a church, who masturbates, is an adulterer, that is, they are committing an act of self-adultery. They are depriving their spouse of the conjugal duty, meeting their own sexual needs apart from and without the spouse, and are asserting their right over their own body against the rights of the spouse, in order to sexually gratify themselves. This isn’t being done for spiritual reasons; rather it’s being done out of lust, i.e. a desire to selfishly experience a physical climax of the stimulated sex organ without the spouse.

Now, if you’ve been reading to this point, you might be wondering why I would take the time to single out masturbation as a sin and write a polemic against it. That’s a valid question with a valid answer.

Remember that this is an addendum to a previously written blog, one that directly engages and condemns the use of pornography in all its forms. So ask yourself, what is the one thing, more than any other thing, a person does when they view pornography?

They masturbate. Granted, some couples, married or otherwise, use pornographic materials together, but for the most part, the use of pornography and the sin of masturbation that accompanies the use is done privately by one’s self.

And as a final proof that masturbation is a sin, just think of the public’s view. If it was an acceptable sexual experience, people would talk about it openly. Masturbation wouldn’t just be the punch-line in a joke or a running gag in some raucous, raunchy comedy. It would be an acceptable norm. But it’s not.

Most adults in the world today can talk about their sex lives (at least adults in the world). But almost no one but perverts will talk about, let alone boast about, their self-sex lives.

Same with pornography. Yes, it’s out there, just like masturbation, and millions upon millions of people engage in both on a daily basis. But the following conversation never happens at the office:

“Hey, Bob. What did you do over the weekend?”

“I downloaded a few porno’s and masturbated. How about you?”

“Well, I didn’t download any movies, but I masturbated once or twice in the shower. The wife was away at her sister’s for a visit, so, you know, I had to get my fix one way or another.”

“I hear you. Well, if you ever want to download a pornographic movie, I have several I’d be happy to recommend.”

“Thanks, Bob. I appreciate that. You know, my wife is going away over the holidays, so I might check in with you then about what ones you recommend.”

“Sounds good. Just give me a call and I’ll bring them over.”

As ridiculous as the above scenario may seem, it makes the point because it’s so ridiculous. People everywhere know, even those who engage in pornography and masturbation, that it’s wrong, that it must be kept hidden from the public and that no one must know about it, or else terrible shame, disappointment, and/or ridicule will result.[6]

And that’s the very definition of what it means for something to be dirty, i.e. unclean or sexually perverse. Pornography and the secret pornication that pornography causes, up to and especially including masturbation, is dirty, and it is sin.

_________________________________________________________________________________________

[1] See: http://biblehub.com/greek/680.htm.

[2] The impact upon a person’s body when they are consensually touched by a lover literally modifies or changes the state of the body, that is, for example, the brain sends signals to the heart which causes blood to flow into the genitalia and prepares the person for sexual engagement. Other changes occur as well: quickened pulse, heightened tactile sensitivity, involuntary vocal sounds, and etc.

[3] For an explanation of why I change the “f” in fornication to a “p” see: https://votivesoul.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/pornications-dirty-little-secret

[4] See: https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=g1223

[5] For “deprive” in place of “default”, see: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+7%3A5&version=ESV

[6] This is of course a bell curve scenario. There are those who care not for public opinion and readily engage in both and are open about it. But the majority of people who engage in both, one way or another, will never openly discuss their engagement due to the shame, hurt, and embarrassment it would cause.

You Might Be A Gentile…

•09/08/2017 • 2 Comments

For tonight’s blog entry, I give you a variation on the famous Jeff Foxworthy comedy bit called You Might Be a Redneck…. However, where as he intended everything he said in the bit to be funny, nothing I write here is intended to be comical. So, without further ado:

You Might Be A Gentile:

If you sacrifice to devils, you might be a Gentile (1 Corinthians 10:20).

If you are carried away by “dumb idols”, you might be a Gentile (1 Corinthians 12:2).

If you are by nature a sinner, you might be a Gentile (Galatians 2:15).

If you are without Christ, you might be a Gentile (Ephesians 2:11-12).

If you are an alien to the commonwealth of Israel, you might be a Gentile (Ephesians 2:11-12).

If you are a stranger to the covenants of promise, you might be a Gentile (Ephesians 2:11-12).

If you are without hope, you might be a Gentile (Ephesians 2:11-12).

If you walk in the vanity of your mind, you might be a Gentile (Ephesians 4:17-19).

If you have your understanding darkened, you might be a Gentile (Ephesians 4:17-19).

If you are alienated from the life of God through ignorance because of your blindness of heart, you might be a Gentile (Ephesians 4:17-19).

If you are past feeling because you’ve given yourself over to lasciviousness to work all uncleanness with greediness, you might be a Gentile (Ephesians 4:17-19).

If you possess your vessel in the lust of concupiscence you might be a Gentile (1 Thessalonians 4:4-5).

If you don’t know God, you might be a Gentile (1 Thessalonians 4:4-5).

If you walk in lasciviousness, you might be a Gentile (1 Peter 4:3).

If you walk in lusts, you might be a Gentile (1 Peter 4:3).

If you walk in excessive wine, you might be a Gentile (1 Peter 4:3).

If you walk in revellings, you might be a Gentile (1 Peter 4:3).

If you walk in banquetings, you might be a Gentile (1 Peter 4:3).

If you walk in abominable idolatries, you might be a Gentile (1 Peter 4:3).

And, finally…

If you rule over and exercise lordship, dominion, and authority over and/or upon others and are considered their benefactor for doing so, you might be a Gentile (Matthew 20:25, Mark 10:14, Luke 22:5).

 
Mark Showalter's Blog

Always seeking to know God more

Thinking to Believe

A place where THINKING is believing