Respect as Women

[KeptByTheWord]

I've pondered my thoughts on this needful discussion, because the issue presented is one that I have struggled with as well. Equality of women, women in ministry, a woman with a career, and being a mother/homemaker are issues that most women are very familiar with. As a Christian, for a woman trying to find the place she needs to be that is best for her family, and for herself, can be tough, especially in the generation we live in now.

I grew up in OP, and never knew anything but this culture and way of life. I would say even as one other poster did, that most of the time, the OP encourages young people to marry at a young age as a way to deal with the issue of sex before marriage. I don't know that it is so much a respect for a woman, as it is trying to deal with the issue of fornication.

I do think that motherhood is an honored place within the OP ranks, certainly as Titus 2 teaching would indicate.

One of Peter Marshall's sermons, preached back in the 1940s, Keeper of the Springs, I think holds a lot of valuable input for this discussion. The full sermon can be read here.

I like his thought that we as women are "Keepers of the Springs", and I was amazed at his insight more than 60 years ago, and if things were as bad then (as he said they were), I can't imagine what he would have to say today!

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by Sasha

I wish there had been more teaching on sex when I was younger. Not from the kids at school or even from my parents. The church talked so much about how I should dress, they never taught about how I should act or how to have respect for myself.

Yes. I think way too much time is spent on how to dress/look/act... etc... when young girls need to be taught exactly what young men are thinking when they look at them, and what their bodies and actions do to the thoughts of young men who are dealing with their hormones going crazy as teenagers. And on the flip side - young boys need to be taught by the older men how to deal with their raging hormones, instead of sweeping it all under the carpet and in the end, having to have forced marriages, and unexpected pregnancies.

I am not saying this would completely eradicate the problem, but education in this area would go a long way to preventing many, many heartaches.

I truly believe too... that if more fathers spent time with their daughters explaining actions of young boys... more pregnancies could be prevented, because girls would understand that a boy's reaction to them is not that of love, but of lust, and there is a HUGE difference!

[missourimary]

Of all the young people who dated in the Apostolic churches I've attended, I'd say half either had sex before they were married or were married within three months of their first serious date.
In one there was even a long standing rule for how long a couple would be kicked out if they were caught.

I think just like in most other circles, some people were respected and others were not depending on the expectations of the particular group.

[missourimary]

I agree' keptbytheword, the marriage thing wa probably more to discourage fornication than oo respect women.

I also agree that in churches I've attended there is a serious lack of teaching people to respect each other or themselves.

[votivesoul]

I'm male, 35 years old, married for six and half years, with two children, ages 3 and 1. I have a Bachelor of Arts degree in Spanish, magna cum laude from UW-Whitewater.

God saved me March 9th, 2003. I was 24. I was, prior to conversion, not raised in any religious belief system at all.

My wife is 28. She received the baptism of the Holy Spirit when she was 5, and was immersed into the name of Jesus Christ two years later when she was 7, along with her mom and dad. She was raised in the Apostolic/Pentecostal faith, attending a UPCI church for most of her life. She has an Associate's Degree in Christian Ministry, magna cum laude, from Apostolic Bible Institute, St. Paul, MN, an UPCI endorsed Bible college.

We currently attend an Apostolic Pentecostal Church affiliated with the UPCI: www.rockofjesus.org.

I present all this to, as one of my sociology professors instructed, reveal my biases.

My wife and I live a very traditional, conservative life. Our church, in some ways, leans conservative, but in other ways, is much more liberal than the average UPCI affiliated assembly (it would be too long of a post to explain everything I mean by this).

Within our local assembly, there is what I consider a wide array of views on the roles of men and women. I do not think any married couple is unduly influenced in any direction, except for constant reminders to seek the Lord and let Him be the governing head and influence in the marriage.

As for me and my wife, we have successfully embraced the teachings of Scriptures, and ours is a very happy marriage. My wife looks to me for leadership, counsel, and decisions, and submits to me as her head, out of respect for God and for me. I look to my wife for help, comfort, counsel, support, and give honor to her as the weaker vessel, leading as her head out of love for God and for her.

When this is done correctly, it really works. IT REALLY WORKS!!! God knows what He is doing. My wife is my best friend, my only truly trusted adviser and compatriot. She is the go-to iron that sharpens me and keeps me intact. My wife admits that except for God, I am the chief source of her personal happiness.

I say all that to say two things:

1.) If women are, in any collective sense, ever disrespected, I look strongly at the men involved, first. A woman may be substandard in speech, action, attitude, appearance, demeanor, and etc., and so fail the grace of God in any number of ways. But so what? Men should rise above their own base natures and, in Christ, treat such a woman better than she might otherwise deserve. Such grace might just help her rise above her own base nature and seek to become more Godly, too.

The fact is, the greater onus is on men. They are chosen of God to be the leaders, the heads, the patriarchs who are to govern their families, and through their families, by extension, all of society. Such extra responsibility and accountability requires greater diligence and effort to meet or exceed God's demands on them.

This isn't to say that women are exempt from any responsibility at all. A woman ought to follow the "Golden Rule" as much as men, and do better by undeserving men than the men are doing by them.

2.) We must never neglect or forget the spiritual side of things. Eve was deceived. Adam openly rebelled. There is a difference in this. Some churches suffer Jezebel. But then again, some churches have a Balaam, too. These spiritual forces, more than just one's carnal nature, are to be blamed for much of what's wrong between the genders.

Our war is not against flesh and blood. The unloveable woman is not the real enemy. The undeserving of respect man isn't the enemy, either. So, if there's such a problem existing in a church, a culture, a society, in a marriage, chances are there is way more at stake, and much more going on than merely the flesh.

If a devil can destroy a family, the society to which that family belongs will suffer. If a devil can undermine a Christian home, the church to which the family belongs will suffer.

When Job, in his trial, was at his worst, it was when? When the devil attacked his flesh. But take a look at what happened when the devil so attacked. His wife turned on him and ordered him to renounce God and die. It wasn't just a physical attack on the man's body. It was also a spiritual attack delivered through the flesh of his flesh, the bone of his bone, i.e. his wife.

If the devil cannot openly destroy a man, he will covertly attack the woman, in order to destroy the man. Why? Because it was only when Adam openly rebelled, that sin was introduced into the world, and death through sin. Had Adam not shared in the fruit, sin and death would not have been introduced. Eve could have been saved from her actions. But once Adam fell, he, through his actions, brought sin and death upon her, and then, to their family, onward to all humans everywhere.

This proves that the men of the world are more responsible and accountable to God for how the world goes. Eve didn't introduce sin and death. Adam did. The devil wasn't interested in Eve falling. He was after Adam through Eve. And the same thing has been true ever since. The devil will pounce on and destroy any woman, Christian or otherwise, if it means he can get to the men of the world.

And, when looking at the world today, I think it's safe to say he has largely succeeded, even in the church. Men, by nature, are suicidal and self-destructive. But men want everyone to go down with them, too, including their women and the children their women give them.

So please, don't neglect or forget the spiritual side of this issue. It's way more pressing than we sometimes realize.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

I'm male, 35 years old, married for six and half years, with two children, ages 3 and 1. I have a Bachelor of Arts degree in Spanish, magna cum laude from UW-Whitewater.

God saved me March 9th, 2003. I was 24. I was, prior to conversion, not raised in any religious belief system at all.

My wife is 28. She received the baptism of the Holy Spirit when she was 5, and was immersed into the name of Jesus Christ two years later when she was 7, along with her mom and dad. She was raised in the Apostolic/Pentecostal faith, attending a UPCI church for most of her life. She has an Associate's Degree in Christian Ministry, magna cum laude, from Apostolic Bible Institute, St. Paul, MN, an UPCI endorsed Bible college.

We currently attend an Apostolic Pentecostal Church affiliated with the UPCI: www.rockofjesus.org.

I present all this to, as one of my sociology professors instructed, reveal my biases.

My wife and I live a very traditional, conservative life. Our church, in some ways, leans conservative, but in other ways, is much more liberal than the average UPCI affiliated assembly (it would be too long of a post to explain everything I mean by this).

Within our local assembly, there is what I consider a wide array of views on the roles of men and women. I do not think any married couple is unduly influenced in any direction, except for constant reminders to seek the Lord and let Him be the governing head and influence in the marriage.

As for me and my wife, we have successfully embraced the teachings of Scriptures, and ours is a very happy marriage. My wife looks to me for leadership, counsel, and decisions, and submits to me as her head, out of respect for God and for me. I look to my wife for help, comfort, counsel, support, and give honor to her as the weaker vessel, leading as her head out of love for God and for her.

When this is done correctly, it really works. IT REALLY WORKS!!! God knows what He is doing. My wife is my best friend, my only truly trusted adviser and compatriot. She is the go-to iron that sharpens me and keeps me intact. My wife admits that except for God, I am the chief source of her personal happiness.

I say all that to say two things:

1.) If women are, in any collective sense, ever disrespected, I look strongly at the men involved, first. A woman may be substandard in speech, action, attitude, appearance, demeanor, and etc., and so fail the grace of God in any number of ways. But so what? Men should rise above their own base natures and, in Christ, treat such a woman better than she might otherwise deserve. Such grace might just help her rise above her own base nature and seek to become more Godly, too.

The fact is, the greater onus is on men. They are chosen of God to be the leaders, the heads, the patriarchs who are to govern their families, and through their families, by extension, all of society. Such extra responsibility and accountability requires greater diligence and effort to meet or exceed God's demands on them.

This isn't to say that women are exempt from any responsibility at all. A woman ought to follow the "Golden Rule" as much as men, and do better by undeserving men than the men are doing by them.

2.) We must never neglect or forget the spiritual side of things. Eve was deceived. Adam openly rebelled. There is a difference in this. Some churches suffer Jezebel. But then again, some churches have a Balaam, too. These spiritual forces, more than just one's carnal nature, are to be blamed for much of what's wrong between the genders.

Our war is not against flesh and blood. The unloveable woman is not the real enemy. The undeserving of respect man isn't the enemy, either. So, if there's such a problem existing in a church, a culture, a society, in a marriage, chances are there is way more at stake, and much more going on than merely the flesh.

If a devil can destroy a family, the society to which that family belongs will suffer. If a devil can undermine a Christian home, the church to which the family belongs will suffer.

When Job, in his trial, was at his worst, it was when? When the devil attacked his flesh. But take a look at what happened when the devil so attacked. His wife turned on him and ordered him to renounce God and die. It wasn't just a physical attack on the man's body. It was also a spiritual attack delivered through the flesh of his flesh, the bone of his bone, i.e. his wife.

If the devil cannot openly destroy a man, he will covertly attack the woman, in order to destroy the man. Why? Because it was only when Adam openly rebelled, that sin was introduced into the world, and death through sin. Had Adam not shared in the fruit, sin and death would not have been introduced. Eve could have been saved from her actions. But once Adam fell, he, through his actions, brought sin and death upon her, and then, to their family, onward to all humans everywhere.

This proves that the men of the world are more responsible and accountable to God for how the world goes. Eve didn't introduce sin and death. Adam did. The devil wasn't interested in Eve falling. He was after Adam through Eve. And the same thing has been true ever since. The devil will pounce on and destroy any woman, Christian or otherwise, if it means he can get to the men of the world.

And, when looking at the world today, I think it's safe to say he has largely succeeded, even in the church. Men, by nature, are suicidal and self-destructive. But men want everyone to go down with them, too, including their women and the children their women give them.

So please, don't neglect or forget the spiritual side of this issue. It's way more pressing than we sometimes realize.

I thought this was a very good write up.

I would like to add that there are many phytoestrogens in the world as well, that attack people on a cellular level, that may actually feminize men to some extent.

[ILG]

After reading a number of posts by people who were in the church at a young age and felt that there was less respect for women and more pressure to avoid fornication involved, it got me to thinking. I had a dream back when. I believed in the dream. I loved the dream. Right after I was saved, and had a truly miraculous conversion, I was full of God, love and hope. I transferred all this hope into what I was taught. I would like to write up the standards that were taught, what I believed about them and what I came to believe the church actually taught...which was different than what I actually believed. These differences were so pronounced, they caused me to leave the church, believing the whole movement was toxic.

Make-up:
What I believed the teaching represented:
1. I was beautiful just the way I was.
2. I did not need to be any more than just what I was and who I was and I did not need to try and please men with my looks the way the media teaches.
3. The men in the church believed and respected this.
4. I was free and accepted as a woman rather than a sex object for men to behold.

What the church seems to have taught in reality:
1. Women who wear make-up are whores who want sex.
2. Women who wear make-up are lost.
3. Women who wear make-up are spiritual Jezebels wanting to seduce men.
4. If you wear make-up, ever, for any reason, you are backslid and will be cast into outer darkness.

I was so confused by this. What I saw as a beautiful message became twisted into something so ugly. If the church taught and believed what I had initially thought, only compassion would be shown to those who stray, there would be no need for hell-fire and Jezebel-harlot teachings. The first set of teachings are beautiful. The second set are so twisted to be so ugly, and, I believe, an abomination to God.

Pants on Women
What I originally thought and believed:
1. Being a woman is special and should be respected.
2. I don't have to try and be like a man because there was a special place for me in this world and that place mattered and I did not have to be ashamed of it.
3. Feeling feminine, rather than masculine, for women is good. You don't have to run the rat race, burn your bra, and try to be tough. You can be soft, feminine you.
4. You can be respected for who you are and what you are and wearing a dress represents this in a traditional way, reminding yourself and others that being a woman is important and good.

What the church ends up teaching instead:
1. Women who wear pants are an abomination to God.
2. Women who wear pants promote homosexuality (took right out of a book by DK Bernard) because they blur the sex lines.
3. Women who wear pants are backslid and God-haters.
4. Women who wear pants want to be men.

Again, if the church was confident in it's stance and actually believed the first set rather than the second, you would see only compassion towards people who are different than they are. Instead, there is a sheer ugliness and vitriol towards those who are different than them, much like the Westboro Baptist Church is to homosexuals. You may not believe homosexuality is right, but in the Westboro church, there is a sick vitriol towards them. I would rather hang around with some homosexuals than I would the Westboro church.

Jewelry
What I believed:
1. I am beautiful just as I am. I am a jewel of God.
2. Jewelry can be about status. Status is not important. We are all important as individuals no matter how much money we have.
3. We should not flaunt ourselves.

What the church taught:
1. Status means a lot. Wear any jewelry that you can, like wedding rings, tie tacks, hair doo-thingy's etc. but NOT necklaces or you will get into trouble.

Costly array:
What I believed:
1. Same as jewelry. We should not flaunt ourselves. We are important AS A PERSON, not for what we wear.

Church:
1. Not addressed. Please, by all means, wear as expensive clothes as you can, especially at general conference, to show off.

Hair,
What I believed:
1. Long hair was, again, a feminine attribute, that was something that reminded women that we are special for who we are.
2. Long hair was a sign of who I was in the order of God, something I was not ashamed of.

Church:
1. If you trim your hair a teeny bit, you are going to hell.
2. Your uncut hair mans you are second to your husband and he's over you. If you cut your hair, the angels will wreak havoc and your husband could have an affair and that would be your fault. (Have you read some of Ruth Reider's stuff??)

Again, when I entered the church, I only saw the good of these things and did so for 16 years. My internal beliefs and relationship with God held onto these things and lifted me up. But the beliefs of the church, the negativity, the toxicity was a constant wearing and I was also a Pharisee in the things I said because I parroted the party lines but did not know how to express what was in my heart and what I truly believed.

Now, I am free to believe what I believe without toxicity. I don't attend church. I have great fear of my beautiful beliefs being sullied by some church's dogma. My dreams have been shattered. However, slowly, rising up out of the dust, these broken pieces are being put back together. I don't know how it will end. I don't know what I will do or where I will go. But, going on 9 years after leaving, I am finally starting to feel myself again sometimes. I get wistful as I have off and on over these past years. Spiritually, I don't know who I am or where I am going. That is so different from what I used to know. But, I know WHO I am kept by. That's really all that matters to me.

Comments welcome.

[Sasha]

Love you, ILG!

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

As for me and my wife, we have successfully embraced the teachings of Scriptures, and ours is a very happy marriage. My wife looks to me for leadership, counsel, and decisions, and submits to me as her head, out of respect for God and for me. I look to my wife for help, comfort, counsel, support, and give honor to her as the weaker vessel, leading as her head out of love for God and for her.

When this is done correctly, it really works. IT REALLY WORKS!!! God knows what He is doing. My wife is my best friend, my only truly trusted adviser and compatriot. She is the go-to iron that sharpens me and keeps me intact. My wife admits that except for God, I am the chief source of her personal happiness.

Votivesoul... this is beautiful, and you are right, it really does work. I can attest to that in my own home as well. Thank you for expressing it so beautifully.

Originally Posted by votivesoul

The fact is, the greater onus is on men. They are chosen of God to be the leaders, the heads, the patriarchs who are to govern their families, and through their families, by extension, all of society. Such extra responsibility and accountability requires greater diligence and effort to meet or exceed God's demands on them.

This isn't to say that women are exempt from any responsibility at all. A woman ought to follow the "Golden Rule" as much as men, and do better by undeserving men than the men are doing by them.

Originally Posted by votivesoul

If the devil cannot openly destroy a man, he will covertly attack the woman, in order to destroy the man. Why? Because it was only when Adam openly rebelled, that sin was introduced into the world, and death through sin. Had Adam not shared in the fruit, sin and death would not have been introduced. Eve could have been saved from her actions. But once Adam fell, he, through his actions, brought sin and death upon her, and then, to their family, onward to all humans everywhere.

This proves that the men of the world are more responsible and accountable to God for how the world goes. Eve didn't introduce sin and death. Adam did. The devil wasn't interested in Eve falling. He was after Adam through Eve. And the same thing has been true ever since. The devil will pounce on and destroy any woman, Christian or otherwise, if it means he can get to the men of the world.

And, when looking at the world today, I think it's safe to say he has largely succeeded, even in the church. Men, by nature, are suicidal and self-destructive. But men want everyone to go down with them, too, including their women and the children their women give them.

So please, don't neglect or forget the spiritual side of this issue. It's way more pressing than we sometimes realize.

Yes, what you are saying is so true. Because of our emotional natures, women are at more risk of being deceived, but when the men who are given natures by God to protect and keep us safe from deception fail to lovingly do so, we see the mess of the world that we are in today. I appreciate you sharing who you are and where you are coming from, and I appreciate your willingness to teach the truth of just how God created man and women, how different we are, and yet, how much we were created for each other.

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by ILG

After reading a number of posts by people who were in the church at a young age and felt that there was less respect for women and more pressure to avoid fornication involved, it got me to thinking. I had a dream back when. I believed in the dream. I loved the dream. Right after I was saved, and had a truly miraculous conversion, I was full of God, love and hope. I transferred all this hope into what I was taught. I would like to write up the standards that were taught, what I believed about them and what I came to believe the church actually taught...which was different than what I actually believed. These differences were so pronounced, they caused me to leave the church, believing the whole movement was toxic.

Make-up:
What I believed the teaching represented:
1. I was beautiful just the way I was.
2. I did not need to be any more than just what I was and who I was and I did not need to try and please men with my looks the way the media teaches.
3. The men in the church believed and respected this.
4. I was free and accepted as a woman rather than a sex object for men to behold.

What the church seems to have taught in reality:
1. Women who wear make-up are whores who want sex.
2. Women who wear make-up are lost.
3. Women who wear make-up are spiritual Jezebels wanting to seduce men.
4. If you wear make-up, ever, for any reason, you are backslid and will be cast into outer darkness.

I was so confused by this. What I saw as a beautiful message became twisted into something so ugly. If the church taught and believed what I had initially thought, only compassion would be shown to those who stray, there would be no need for hell-fire and Jezebel-harlot teachings. The first set of teachings are beautiful. The second set are so twisted to be so ugly, and, I believe, an abomination to God.

Pants on Women
What I originally thought and believed:
1. Being a woman is special and should be respected.
2. I don't have to try and be like a man because there was a special place for me in this world and that place mattered and I did not have to be ashamed of it.
3. Feeling feminine, rather than masculine, for women is good. You don't have to run the rat race, burn your bra, and try to be tough. You can be soft, feminine you.
4. You can be respected for who you are and what you are and wearing a dress represents this in a traditional way, reminding yourself and others that being a woman is important and good.

What the church ends up teaching instead:
1. Women who wear pants are an abomination to God.
2. Women who wear pants promote homosexuality (took right out of a book by DK Bernard) because they blur the sex lines.
3. Women who wear pants are backslid and God-haters.
4. Women who wear pants want to be men.

Again, if the church was confident in it's stance and actually believed the first set rather than the second, you would see only compassion towards people who are different than they are. Instead, there is a sheer ugliness and vitriol towards those who are different than them, much like the Westboro Baptist Church is to homosexuals. You may not believe homosexuality is right, but in the Westboro church, there is a sick vitriol towards them. I would rather hang around with some homosexuals than I would the Westboro church.

Jewelry
What I believed:
1. I am beautiful just as I am. I am a jewel of God.
2. Jewelry can be about status. Status is not important. We are all important as individuals no matter how much money we have.
3. We should not flaunt ourselves.

What the church taught:
1. Status means a lot. Wear any jewelry that you can, like wedding rings, tie tacks, hair doo-thingy's etc. but NOT necklaces or you will get into trouble.

Costly array:
What I believed:
1. Same as jewelry. We should not flaunt ourselves. We are important AS A PERSON, not for what we wear.

Church:
1. Not addressed. Please, by all means, wear as expensive clothes as you can, especially at general conference, to show off.

Hair,
What I believed:
1. Long hair was, again, a feminine attribute, that was something that reminded women that we are special for who we are.
2. Long hair was a sign of who I was in the order of God, something I was not ashamed of.

Church:
1. If you trim your hair a teeny bit, you are going to hell.
2. Your uncut hair mans you are second to your husband and he's over you. If you cut your hair, the angels will wreak havoc and your husband could have an affair and that would be your fault. (Have you read some of Ruth Reider's stuff??)

Again, when I entered the church, I only saw the good of these things and did so for 16 years. My internal beliefs and relationship with God held onto these things and lifted me up. But the beliefs of the church, the negativity, the toxicity was a constant wearing and I was also a Pharisee in the things I said because I parroted the party lines but did not know how to express what was in my heart and what I truly believed.

Now, I am free to believe what I believe without toxicity. I don't attend church. I have great fear of my beautiful beliefs being sullied by some church's dogma. My dreams have been shattered. However, slowly, rising up out of the dust, these broken pieces are being put back together. I don't know how it will end. I don't know what I will do or where I will go. But, going on 9 years after leaving, I am finally starting to feel myself again sometimes. I get wistful as I have off and on over these past years. Spiritually, I don't know who I am or where I am going. That is so different from what I used to know. But, I know WHO I am kept by. That's really all that matters to me.

Comments welcome.

Wow! I've never heard this put so eloquently before, and the truth of it should rock every person's world who believes that the church has a right to teach hell fire and brimstone at the cost of subverting a beautiful teaching as it should have been taught.

I pray that every pastor who believes the clothesline standard will read this, and thoughtfully reconsider how they are presenting their version of holiness or righteous living. Just maybe, enough people will begin to realize that threatening people with hell fire, judgement, and so on, is far from where this message was intended to go.

I pray that the original presentation, as so eloquently expressed by ILG, would begin to be presented to women, instead of the judgmental, hell fire, salvation-basis, what a difference it would make!!