Difference between revisions of "Page:Woman-1949.djvu/8"

From En JW United
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Page body (to be transcluded):Page body (to be transcluded):
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
{{raw:data:c|
 
{{raw:data:c|
{{raw:data:p|c|
+
{{raw:data:p|c|never does he contradict himself or clash with himself. As to spiritual opportunities in the new world, his Word holds out equal promise to faithful believers regardless of their present earthly situation. Yet  
never does he contradict himself or clash with himself. As to spiritual opportunities in the new world,  
+
the all-wise God does not overlook the fact that Christ's followers on earth are still in the flesh and still in this world the god of which is Satan the Devil, Eve's tempter. (2 Cor. 4: -:1:) Christians are still male and female according to the flesh. If God did not take note of this sexual difference, then he would not authorize marriage among Christians or the female Christians' bearing children. But the Most High God adjusts the relationship of male to female in the best interests of both, and he assigns to them their privileges of service in his Theocratic organization.}}
his Word holds out equal promise to faithful believers regardless of their present earthly situation. Yet  
 
the all-wise God does not overlook the fact that  
 
Christ's followers on earth are still in the flesh and  
 
still in this world the god of which is Satan the Devil,  
 
Eve's tempter. (2 Cor. 4: -:1:) Christians are still male  
 
and female according to the flesh. If God did not take  
 
note of this sexual difference, then he would not  
 
authorize marriage among Christians or the female  
 
Christians' bearing children. But the Most High God  
 
adjusts the relationship of male to female in the best  
 
interests of both, and he assigns to them their privileges of service in his Theocratic organization.}}
 
  
{{raw:data:p|8|Full faith and wisdom accepts meekly and gratefully what arrangement God makes. He is not to be  
+
{{raw:data:p|8|Full faith and wisdom accepts meekly and gratefully what arrangement God makes. He is not to be found fault with over what disposition he makes of the sexes, nor is he to be blamed. Just because Eve yielded to seduction in Eden and then used her charms and influence with Adam to turn him criminal against God's law, God is not to be blamed for making woman, and man is not to take it out on woman. Jehovah God is the great Theocrat and Creator. Like a potter with his clay he has the power and  
found fault with over what disposition he makes of  
+
right to make out of the same lump of creative material one vessel for honorable service and another vessel for a seemingly menial service, yet useful and indispensable. Neither vessel that leaves his hands with a service assignment has the right to complain and say: "Why have you made me this way? Why do you gall me with service in this position?" That would be rebellious, untheocratic. It is an honor and favor to serve him in any position.-Rom. 9: 20-24.}}
the sexes, nor is he to be blamed. Just because Eve  
 
yielded to seduction in Eden and then used her  
 
charms and influence with Adam to turn him criminal  
 
against God's law, God is not to be blamed for making woman, and man is not to take it out on woman.  
 
Jehovah God is the great Theocrat and Creator.  
 
Like a potter with his clay he has the power and  
 
right to make out of the same lump of creative  
 
material one vessel for honorable service and another  
 
vessel for a seemingly menial service, yet useful and  
 
indispensable. Neither vessel that leaves his hands  
 
with a service assignment has the right to complain  
 
and say: "Why have you made me this way? Why  
 
do you gall me with service in this position?" That  
 
would be rebellious, untheocratic. It is an honor and  
 
favor to serve him in any position.-Rom. 9: 20-24.}}
 
  
{{raw:data:p|9|It should therefore not sound as a sour note in  
+
{{raw:data:p|9|It should therefore not sound as a sour note in feminine ears when the same apostle who sounds out equality for womankind with the words, "There is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus," shows that on earth there are limitations to the service privileges of female Christians. It was not an arbitrary masculine decision on his part. By inspiration he had the mind of Jehovah the Theocrat upon the matter, and he showed the reason for the restrictions placed upon his Christian sisters. He showed it was her privilege on earth to demonstrate subjection, submission, and to do this, not as a galling task, but in a Christlike spirit, and that the angels in heaven were watching. Because of Jehovah's Theocracy, the principle of headship obtains throughout the universe, and correspondingly all creatures must learn subjection according to the  
feminine ears when the same apostle who sounds out  
+
divine or Theocratic will. So the apostle writes: "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (1 Cor. 11: 3) Should this be taken as disparaging to the female sex? No; no}}
equality for womankind with the words, "There is  
+
{{raw:data:m|5|0|{{raw:data:cc|55|{{raw:data:s-01|2}}}}}}{{raw:data:q|9|Why is it not disparaging to woman to be submissive now?}}
neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ  
 
Jesus," shows that on earth there are limitations to  
 
the service privileges of female Christians. It was  
 
not an arbitrary masculine decision on his part. By  
 
inspiration he had the mind of Jehovah the Theocrat  
 
upon the matter, and he showed the reason for the  
 
restrictions placed upon his Christian sisters. He  
 
showed it was her privilege on earth to demonstrate  
 
subjection, submission, and to do this, not as a galling task, but in a Christlike spirit, and that the  
 
angels in heaven were watching. Because of Jehovah's Theocracy, the principle of headship obtains  
 
throughout the universe, and correspondingly all  
 
creatures must learn subjection according to the  
 
divine or Theocratic will. So the apostle writes: "But  
 
I would have you know, that the head of every man  
 
is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and  
 
the head of Christ is God." (1 Cor. 11: 3) Should this  
 
be taken as disparaging to the female sex 1 No; no}}
 
 
9. Why Is It not disparaging to woman to be submissive now?  
 
  
|{{raw:data:p|c|more than it should be taken as disparaging to the  
+
|{{raw:data:p|c|more than it should be taken as disparaging to the male sex or, more than that, disparaging to Christ. Certainly only Jehovah God could be without a head over him, for he is the Most High of all the universe.}}
male sex or, more than that, disparaging to Christ.  
 
Certainly only Jehovah God could be without a head  
 
over him, for he is the Most High of all the universe.}}
 
  
{{raw:data:s|VEILING}}  
+
{{raw:data:ta|c|{{raw:data:s|VEILING}}}}
  
{{raw:data:p|10|Upon the basis of this Theocratic arrangement
 
of headship and of subjection the apostle shows the
 
attitudes that are to be taken by members of the
 
congregation according to sex. Bear in mind that
 
man's head is Christ Jesus and woman's head is man.
 
as we read: "Any man who prays or prophesies with
 
a veil on his head dishonours his head, while any
 
woman who prays or prophesies without a veil on
 
her head dishonours her head; she is no better than
 
a shaven woman. If a woman will not veil herself,
 
she should cut off her hair as well. But she ought
 
to veil herself; for it is disgraceful that a woman
 
should have her hair cut off or be shaven." (1 Cor.
 
11: 4 - 6, Moffatt) That is, in the apostle's day it was
 
disgraceful for a woman to have her hair clipped
 
short, or worse still, all shaved off with a razor.
 
How so? Why, then it was the custom among the
 
pagans of the Roman Empire for slavegirls to have
 
their hair cropped to denote their bondage and
 
menial position. Besides that, when a woman ,vas
 
found guilty of immorality, either fornication or
 
adultery, she was sentenced by the court to have her
 
head shaved bald. The Roman Empire, and notoriously the city of Corinth to the Christians in which
 
the apostle wrote, were very corrupt. So if a woman
 
appeared on the streets without a veil to cover her
 
face she was taken to be a person of low morals and
 
of easy virtue. Hence women who were anxious to
 
keep their respectability never appeared in public
 
with face exposed to everybody.}}
 
  
{{raw:data:p|11|The apostle Paul had already cited a case of  
+
{{raw:data:p|10|Upon the basis of this Theocratic arrangement of headship and of subjection the apostle shows the attitudes that are to be taken by members of the congregation according to sex. Bear in mind that man's head is Christ Jesus and woman's head is man. as we read: "Any man who prays or prophesies with a veil on his head dishonours his head, while any woman who prays or prophesies without a veil on her head dishonours her head; she is no better than a shaven woman. If a woman will not veil herself, she should cut off her hair as well. But she ought to veil herself; for it is disgraceful that a woman should have her hair cut off or be shaven." (1 Cor. 11: 4 - 6, Moffatt) That is, in the apostle's day it was disgraceful for a woman to have her hair clipped short, or worse still, all shaved off with a razor. How so? Why, then it was the custom among the pagans of the Roman Empire for slavegirls to have their hair cropped to denote their bondage and menial position. Besides that, when a woman ,vas found guilty of immorality, either fornication or adultery, she was sentenced by the court to have her head shaved bald. The Roman Empire, and notoriously the city of Corinth to the Christians in which the apostle wrote, were very corrupt. So if a woman appeared on the streets without a veil to cover her face she was taken to be a person of low morals and of easy virtue. Hence women who were anxious to
gross immorality in the Corinthian congregation,  
+
keep their respectability never appeared in public with face exposed to everybody.}}
that of a supposed brother haying his father's wife.  
+
 
So Paul expressed the fear that when he visited their  
+
{{raw:data:p|11|The apostle Paul had already cited a case of gross immorality in the Corinthian congregation, that of a supposed brother haying his father's wife. So Paul expressed the fear that when he visited their  
congregation he might find various disorders among  
+
congregation he might find various disorders among them and also some individuals "who sinned some time ago and yet have never repented of their impurity, their sexual vice and sensual practices". (2 Cor. 12: 20, 21, Moffatt) Since it was the custom for a woman to appear veiled in public, the apostle Paul did not wish the Christian sisters to violate that accepted rule of respectability by going to congregational meetings unveiled. If they did attend unveiled, they would build up the reputation that the women of the Corinthian congregation were low in morals. It was not a case of defying custom and giving womankind her entitled freedom to appear barefaced publicly. It was simply a case of being "all things to all men", denying ourselves, so as not}}
them and also some individuals "who sinned some  
+
{{raw:data:m|5|0|{{raw:data:cc|55|{{raw:data:s-01|2}}}}}}
time ago and yet have never repented of their impurity, their sexual vice and sensual practices".  
+
{{raw:data:q|10|Why was an unveiled woman as disgraceful as one shaved bald?}}
(2 Cor. 12: 20, 21, Moffatt) Since it was the custom  
+
{{raw:data:q|11|So why was the custom of veiling to be kept by Christians?}}
for a woman to appear veiled in public, the apostle  
 
Paul did not wish the Christian sisters to violate  
 
that accepted rule of respectability by going to congregational meetings unveiled. If they did attend  
 
unveiled, they would build up the reputation that  
 
the women of the Corinthian congregation were low  
 
in morals. It was not a case of defying custom and  
 
giving womankind her entitled freedom to appear  
 
barefaced publicly. It was simply a case of being  
 
"all things to all men", denying ourselves, so as not}}
 
 
10. Why was an unveiled woman as disgraceful as one shaved bald?  
 
11. So why was the custom ot velllng to be kept by Christians?  
 
  
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 17:51, 19 June 2021

This page has not been proofread


136
The WATCHTOWER
Brooklyn, N.Y.


never does he contradict himself or clash with himself. As to spiritual opportunities in the new world, his Word holds out equal promise to faithful believers regardless of their present earthly situation. Yet the all-wise God does not overlook the fact that Christ's followers on earth are still in the flesh and still in this world the god of which is Satan the Devil, Eve's tempter. (2 Cor. 4: -:1:) Christians are still male and female according to the flesh. If God did not take note of this sexual difference, then he would not authorize marriage among Christians or the female Christians' bearing children. But the Most High God adjusts the relationship of male to female in the best interests of both, and he assigns to them their privileges of service in his Theocratic organization.
8 Full faith and wisdom accepts meekly and gratefully what arrangement God makes. He is not to be found fault with over what disposition he makes of the sexes, nor is he to be blamed. Just because Eve yielded to seduction in Eden and then used her charms and influence with Adam to turn him criminal against God's law, God is not to be blamed for making woman, and man is not to take it out on woman. Jehovah God is the great Theocrat and Creator. Like a potter with his clay he has the power and right to make out of the same lump of creative material one vessel for honorable service and another vessel for a seemingly menial service, yet useful and indispensable. Neither vessel that leaves his hands with a service assignment has the right to complain and say: "Why have you made me this way? Why do you gall me with service in this position?" That would be rebellious, untheocratic. It is an honor and favor to serve him in any position.-Rom. 9: 20-24.
9 It should therefore not sound as a sour note in feminine ears when the same apostle who sounds out equality for womankind with the words, "There is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus," shows that on earth there are limitations to the service privileges of female Christians. It was not an arbitrary masculine decision on his part. By inspiration he had the mind of Jehovah the Theocrat upon the matter, and he showed the reason for the restrictions placed upon his Christian sisters. He showed it was her privilege on earth to demonstrate subjection, submission, and to do this, not as a galling task, but in a Christlike spirit, and that the angels in heaven were watching. Because of Jehovah's Theocracy, the principle of headship obtains throughout the universe, and correspondingly all creatures must learn subjection according to the divine or Theocratic will. So the apostle writes: "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (1 Cor. 11: 3) Should this be taken as disparaging to the female sex? No; no

more than it should be taken as disparaging to the male sex or, more than that, disparaging to Christ. Certainly only Jehovah God could be without a head over him, for he is the Most High of all the universe.


VEILING


10 Upon the basis of this Theocratic arrangement of headship and of subjection the apostle shows the attitudes that are to be taken by members of the congregation according to sex. Bear in mind that man's head is Christ Jesus and woman's head is man. as we read: "Any man who prays or prophesies with a veil on his head dishonours his head, while any woman who prays or prophesies without a veil on her head dishonours her head; she is no better than a shaven woman. If a woman will not veil herself, she should cut off her hair as well. But she ought to veil herself; for it is disgraceful that a woman should have her hair cut off or be shaven." (1 Cor. 11: 4 - 6, Moffatt) That is, in the apostle's day it was disgraceful for a woman to have her hair clipped short, or worse still, all shaved off with a razor. How so? Why, then it was the custom among the pagans of the Roman Empire for slavegirls to have their hair cropped to denote their bondage and menial position. Besides that, when a woman ,vas found guilty of immorality, either fornication or adultery, she was sentenced by the court to have her head shaved bald. The Roman Empire, and notoriously the city of Corinth to the Christians in which the apostle wrote, were very corrupt. So if a woman appeared on the streets without a veil to cover her face she was taken to be a person of low morals and of easy virtue. Hence women who were anxious to keep their respectability never appeared in public with face exposed to everybody.
11 The apostle Paul had already cited a case of gross immorality in the Corinthian congregation, that of a supposed brother haying his father's wife. So Paul expressed the fear that when he visited their congregation he might find various disorders among them and also some individuals "who sinned some time ago and yet have never repented of their impurity, their sexual vice and sensual practices". (2 Cor. 12: 20, 21, Moffatt) Since it was the custom for a woman to appear veiled in public, the apostle Paul did not wish the Christian sisters to violate that accepted rule of respectability by going to congregational meetings unveiled. If they did attend unveiled, they would build up the reputation that the women of the Corinthian congregation were low in morals. It was not a case of defying custom and giving womankind her entitled freedom to appear barefaced publicly. It was simply a case of being "all things to all men", denying ourselves, so as not