Christ's Law

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Col 3:16 . . Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly as you teach and admonish
one another with all wisdom

Before attempting to teach and admonish one another, it's essential that the word
of Christ first dwell in one's own self richly; which is from a Greek word that means
copious: defined by Webster's as yielding something abundantly. In other words:
fruitful.

The wisdom we're talking about here is gained by life experience wherein a quantity
of Christ's teachings have been put into actual practice rather than only memorized.

* As of today, I've been active on Christian forums all across the internet going on
28 years and can say from experience that much of the "teaching and admonishing"
online typically turns hostile with quarreling, debating, and unkind remarks; and
that's because there are folks out there lacking common social skills like patience,
tact, diplomacy, lenience, tolerance, and gentleness, et al.

Apparently Jesus' teaching about turning the other cheek, going the extra mile, and
the golden rule, have gone out of vogue and no longer apply to modern Christian
conduct; especially in cyberspace where, for some folks, every disagreement is an
act of war to be won at any cost.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Col 3:17 . .Whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of
the Lord Jesus.

In other words: Christ's followers should conduct themselves as Christians as
opposed to conducting themselves in any old way they feel like.

A simple way to apply Col 3:17 is just to ask yourself: Can my master put his
signature on this? If you know in your heart he cannot, then you do not have
Christ's authorization to proceed. If you proceed anyway, then you will be off
reservation-- you'll be in your own little world of anarchy and rebellion against
Christ's sovereign right, as the lord and master of Christianity, to manage your
affairs.
_

 

[Odë:hgöd]

.
● Col 3:18 . .Wives, submit to your husband, as is fitting in The Lord.

NOTE: Here's a new word for your vocabulary: Womxn. You know what that is? It's
the latest desperate attempt by "progressive" women to avoid identifying
themselves with men in every way possible. I suppose they'll next revise the
spelling of their gender to look like this: femxle.

The word "submit" raises a lot of unnecessary hackles. But this particular instance
isn't relative to a pecking order. What it's referring to is deference; defined by
Webster's as a readiness, or willingness, to yield to the wishes of others, which is
just the opposite of demanding.

Anyway: in a nutshell; the submission we're talking about here is related to a
Christian husband's position in the home rather than his gender in the marriage.

For example: back when young Queen Elizabeth II became monarch, her husband
Philip felt humiliated to have to kneel to his own wife till she explained to him that
he wouldn't be kneeling to her, rather, to the crown.

In other words: it's the position that deserves the respect rather than the person in
it. So, Christian wives ought to give their husbands the respect due to his position
in the home rather than the blokes they are.

That's a pretty tall order for Christian wives in a modern culture that constantly
pressures them to be strong and masculine rather than soft and feminine; to be
equals rather than subordinates; and to be defiant rather than diplomatic. (cf. Phil
2:3-4)

NOTE: The Bible teaches that men were made in the image and glory of God. (1Cor
11:7a) Does that make men equal to God? No. The Bible also teaches that women
were made in the image and glory of men. (1Cor 11:7b) Does that make women
equal to men? No.

In neither example does "image and/or glory" indicate equality, viz: God's seniority
is above the man's, and the man's seniority is above the woman's because the man
existed before the woman just as God existed before the man (1Cor 11:8) and the
man was given a leading role whereas the woman was given a supporting role.
(Gen 2:18, Gen 3:16, 1Cor 11:9) Well; it stands to reason that if women were
intended for a supporting role, then they simply cannot be equal to a man's leading
role.

* What was at the very root of the woman's fall from innocence? It was basically
her desire for equality with God (Gen 3:4-6) So the proliferation of suffrage and
feminism should not surprise us. It's simply each succeeding generation of women
handing off the torch of dissatisfaction with their God-given role in the divine plan
to the next.
_