[waltero]

Knowledge of humanity passes through masculinity and femininity. In other words, we can't understand ourselves individually as men or women if we don't have each other. When the author of Genesis says that "the Lord God then built up into a woman the rib that he had taken from the man," and "brought her to the man," he revealed God's critical intention--man was to have a partner like himself in dignity but also different from him in every way--especially on a physical level. And the author tells us that the man himself recognized this as a good exclaiming "at last, this is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh!"

[Wondergirl]

Knowledge of humanity passes through masculinity and femininity. In other words, we can't understand ourselves individually as men or women if we don't have each other. When the author of Genesis says that "the Lord God then built up into a woman the rib that he had taken from the man," and "brought her to the man," he revealed God's critical intention--man was to have a partner like himself in dignity but also different from him in every way--especially on a physical level. And the author tells us that the man himself recognized this as a good exclaiming "at last, this is bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh!"

Excellent post, waltero! Well said and written!

[waltero]

Well said and written!

Looks like Grammer check is Doing its Job.
I'll try not to get so excited, and keep my posts short and to the point.

Should add:

Humans aren’t just made in God’s image, they are called to be his image in the world.

Did God create Jesus? God created Jesus before creating Adam. The Bible calls Jesus “the firstborn of all creation” by God. The Son is the image of the invisible God. Jesus made a choice to submit to the Father as His head...Family life (a thing of the past)...Not "a thing" anymore...spells doom for this world!

[Wondergirl]

Should add:

Humans aren’t just made in God’s image, they are called to be his image in the world.

"Made in the Image of God"...a person can run with that for only so long. When were we called?

When Jesus called us to love one another. The reason we will love others best when we love God most is that love in its truest, purest form comes only from God, because God is love (1 John 4:7–8). Love is a fundamental part of His nature. We are able to love Him or anyone else only because he first loved us (1 John 4:19).

[waltero]

Sorry, I spend two or three hours editing my posts. I had deleted this.

When were we called?

When Jesus called us to love one another.

Uh, OK. I think there's more to it than that. Maybe we can touch base on that later?

Did God create Jesus? God created Jesus before creating Adam. The Bible calls Jesus “the firstborn of all creation” by God. The Son is the image of the invisible God. Jesus made a choice to submit to the Father as His head...Family life (a thing of the past)...Not "a thing" anymore...spells doom for this world!

We are called to be his image in the world.

God is actually a Family.

@WG, Is marriage considered a two-way street?

equal partners with fair give and take.

Jesus made a choice to submit to his Father, as His head. Don't you get it; "We are called to be his image"...trinity if you will.
Was Jesus about fair give and take?

[jlisenbe]

Did God create Jesus? God created Jesus before creating Adam. The Bible calls Jesus “the firstborn of all creation” by God.

You were doing pretty well until this. John 1 clearly contradicts your statement. "1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." The Colossians passage also says, "He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together."

Jesus being the "first born" is not a reference to His creation. It is a reference to His pre-eminence, in the same way that the first born had the highest "rank" in the Jewish culture.

[waltero]

Deep Subject.
Before he was born in Bethlehem, Jesus lived as a spirit in heaven.
John 6:38 38For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.

Micah 5:2 2"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

In the beginning was the Word

I don't fully grasp the concept, but it is something like:
"Where was the Word before it was spoken"?

God is in us, but we are not "of God." We become Sons of God, whence the word is spoken, from out of our mouth/life. 

[jlisenbe]

Jesus was not the spoken word.

[Wondergirl]

@WG, Is marriage considered a two-way street?

Yes, or my husband and I have messed up big time for 54 years!

In your opinion, what are the two ways?

[waltero]

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made." The Colossians passage also says, "He is before all things, and in Him, all things hold together."

Translated Logos: In the beginning was Wisdom, and Wisdom was with God, and the Wisdom was God.

Jesus was not the spoken word.

Clearly, wisdom is not a person, that's a figure of speech. But the Bible says there is a person who is wisdom. “Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (1 Cor. 1:24) Wisdom is a who more than a what. Jesus is Wisdom. Jesus referred to Himself as “the wisdom of God”

Was Jesus about fair give and take?
Yes, or my husband and I have messed up big time for 54 years!

I wouldn't say big time.

[jlisenbe]

I don't think "wisdom" is an acceptable translation for logos.

Jesus is indeed referred to as both the wisdom and power of God, but He is much more than that. He is an eternal person and is fully and eternally God.

Was Jesus about fair give and take? Yes, or my husband and I have messed up big time for 54 years!

Very few things are more dangerous than to suggest that theology is based upon our own personal experiences. Christian beliefs are based upon the statements of the Bible.

[Athos]

Christian beliefs are based upon the statements of the Bible.

What Christian belief is based on God exterminating the entire human race except for Noah?

What Christian belief is based on God saying, "Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks"?

[jlisenbe]

God saying, "Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks"?

God said that? Pretty sure you're wrong on that one.

What Christian belief is based on God exterminating the entire human race except for Noah?

You have misunderstood my comment. I was simply saying that Christian truth is based upon the Bible and not upon our personal experiences. I certainly did not say that every single statement of the Bible establishes a doctrine of some sort. But your example would certainly validate the doctrinal truth that God is not only a God of love and mercy, but also a God of judgment, a truth that can be clearly seen as early as Genesis 3. I realize you don't like that, but it is clear and widespread in both the NT and OT.

[Athos]

God saying, "Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks"?

God said that? Pretty sure you're wrong on that one.

I thought you claimed the Bible was written by God. Do I have that wrong?

your example (i.e., the Flood) would certainly validate the doctrinal truth that God is not only a God of love and mercy, but also a God of judgment

So you DO accept that God exterminated the entire human race? How did he judge babies and children deserving extermination?

I realize you don't like that

It's not about what I like or dislike. It's about the meaning of the words.

In fact, a discussion of Genesis might be fruitful. I might start a thread with that in mind.

[jlisenbe]

I thought you claimed the Bible was written by God. Do I have that wrong?

You do indeed. I've never said that.

So you DO accept that God exterminated the entire human race? How did he judge babies and children deserving extermination?

I've never denied it. It is plainly taught in the Bible, and I accept it.

It's not about what I like or dislike. It's about the meaning of the words.

It has nothing to do with the meaning of words. The meanings are abundantly clear. You don't like what they say and so don't accept them, but to suggest that the meaning of the words is unclear is completely wrong.

Still wondering why, in your description of complementarianism, you failed to include the word "complement", or failing that at least include the concept? You plainly cannot adequately convey the meaning without including that. Why didn't you?

[Wondergirl]

Very few things are more dangerous than to suggest that theology is based upon our own personal experiences. Christian beliefs are based upon the statements of the Bible.

No theology at my house is based on personal experiences. Just the opposite, in fact -- "the two shall be as one" so that's how we operate. I do what he can't and he does what I can't, and we pool our resources to make sure everything gets done/has been done properly and in good order.

[jlisenbe]

It does not say the “two shall be as one.” It does say the wife is to submit to her husband. Says it several times. Also, in the same passage you misquoted, it says marriage is between a man and a woman. Why do you reject that??

[Wondergirl]

It does not say the “two shall be as one.”

Mark 10:8.

It says marriage is between a man and a woman. Why do you reject that??

I don't reject that.

[waltero]

that's how we operate.

"Don't do as I do, do as I say"...your response to Titus 2:3-5?

[jlisenbe]

Mark 10:8 does not say that.

you do reject it when you try to include two men or two women, something Jesus did not do. He clearly limited marriage to a man and a woman.