by Gill 109 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
***
w519/1p.543QuestionsfromReaders***She would not show this sign of subjection to another woman’s husband. Nor would a single sister or widow show this sign of subjection to another woman’s husband. Such unmarried sisters have no male head as does a married woman. The only time the single sister would concern herself about a head-covering is when she comes under congregational conditions calling for it.
The Watch Tower Society must be providing "New Light".
Please contrast the following "Old Light":
W 15. October 1996, p.13, paragraph 19: "Single Sisters, not having a human head to consult with and confide in, may be apt to 'throw their burdens upon Jehovah."
Good quote, it confirms what they said in 1951. Single women do not have a head like married women, not even another man, such as a brother-in-law or a brother. The elders can't tell them what to do any more than they can tell a single or a married man.
Blondie
When women follow God's direction to do so, they set an example for the angels in God's organization arrangement.
According to the Bible, the angels were around before the earth was even created. If they don't know how to act by now, that's not my problem.
Remember that Eve was deceived, but Adam, not deceived, but chose to not lose Eve as a companion and joined in her disobedience. There is something different in the thinking process of women and men, for which reason men are to have the teaching role in doctrinal matters.
This doesn't make sense to me anymore. Why is being honestly and actually deceived [Eve] worse than knowing better and doing wrong anyway [Adam]? How does being willfully and knowingly disobedient qualify someone for "the teaching role in doctrinal matters?"
Blondie, I think you made an interesting point about there being more than one type of headship. For instance, it appears that the WTS used to say that single women had no male human head, but now that they're saying the elders are heads over them. But what does "headship" mean? Would we say that our "heads" are those we "are in submission to"? And hasn't the WTS (using the biblical reference) always said that both men and women are to submit to those taking the lead among us?
This doesn't make sense to me anymore. Why is being honestly and actually deceived [Eve] worse than knowing better and doing wrong anyway [Adam]? How does being willfully and knowingly disobedient qualify someone for "the teaching role in doctrinal matters?"
I used to have the same thoughts, Ingenuous. That WTS quote never made sense to me. Because Adam wasn't misled, but made the conscious decision to disobey God, men are now in charge? I remember some sisters reversing it (usually in jest,) suggesting that women made honest mistakes--but men were the bad guys.
Does it make sense to accuse all women of a weakness that one woman may have had? Ridiculous. And equally ridiculous to accuse men in this way.
Could they be trying to head off another potential 'Barbara Anderson' who is willing to reveal them for what they really are?!
Here's a reply from a cynical corner:
Ted Jaracz, per various reports, has serious heart problems and may not last much longer. Is he getting his "last licks" in, pushing hard-line doctrine, before his demise to make sure his imprint on WT culture is more long-lasting? It would be much harder for his successor(s) to quickly reform WT doctrine that last appeared in print in 2007, vs. say 1987.
Power can make people do strange things, and the idea of losing such power (via death or otherwise) can cause even stranger actions.
Actually WTS elders are heads over men and women in the congregation in the same way, not because they are women, but because they are members in the congregation.
This is not really a new thought that elders are head over sisters in the congregation; they are heads over the men in the same way. But they cannot interfere with their personal lives in the way a husband might or a father might (of a minor child). Elders are not family heads over single parent families when there is only a female parent.
Blondie
I agree Blondie, but that is not quite how it comes over in the article.
'Significantly, however, it is not only when women marry that they come under the headship of men.
The Bible explains that women, whether married or single, should submit to the headship of spiritually qualified men who exercise oversight in the Christian congregation. When women, follow god's direction to do so, they set an example for the angels blah blah de blah....'
There is no mention of men being in subjection in this paragraph. The only way you could work that out is by reading 1 Tim 2: 12 and 13.
In fact when you go to the previous article 'Husbands - Recognize Christ's headship', there is no mention that if an elder comes to visit you, you as a man should listen to him and stop beating your wife because you are in subjection to him.
Do you see what I mean? Men are not reminded of their subjection to Elders.
