Do redeemed women receive glorified male bodies in the afterlife?

/ Sharkly
The floor of one of the coffins of Gua, a physician of the governor Djehutyhotep. The paintings, dated to 1795 B.C., show the “two ways”—land and sea—that the dead could use to navigate the afterlife. An even older “Book of Two Ways” has now been unearthed. (Werner Forman/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

Smithsonian magazine had an article mentioning ancient Egyptian beliefs about the afterlife:

“The inscriptions clearly quote the Book of Two Ways … such “coffin texts” were meant to “situate the deceased in the world of the gods,” … This particular sarcophagus was occupied by a high-status woman named Ankh, though the afterworld instructions in her final resting place actually refer to her as “he.”

“The funny thing is the whole idea of how you survive in the netherworld is expressed in male terms,” …

In ancient Egypt, rebirth was linked most closely to male gods; dead women, then, had to adopt the pronoun “he” to be more like Osiris himself …”

I had previously commented:

The Book of Enoch states that there are no females among the angels, because they were created to live forevermore, and therefore they had no need to reproduce themselves, like some had done with the daughters of men.
Enoch 15:5 It was for this reason that I gave [men] females, in order that they might cast seed into them, and, in this way, beget children by them, in order that descendants should never fail them upon the earth. 6 But you were existing as spirits, while living perpetual, and are immortal for all the generations of the age; 7 and this is why, I did not make females among you. …
I believe I was reading in the book of Jubilees when it was stated that all the redeemed in heaven will be given new incorruptible bodies that are male(sons of God) like the angels. But I can’t find the passage right at this moment. I believe Jesus may have been referring to those scriptures in the following passage:
Matthew 22:28 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. 29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
So I currently wonder if women who are redeemed will quite literally become conformed, sharing in the image and glory of the Son. Will they become brethren, glorified, finally freed from their previously unresolved penis envy, and Eve’s curse?
Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Ray commented: “As for your speculations on women being made into males after the resurrection, I’ll comment later.”  At this point I’m wondering about this concept that seems to have been an extra-Biblical belief, and may be hinted at or even indicated in the Bible itself, according to your interpretation:

Please share your speculations, opinions, revelations, scriptures, or any other thoughts.

31 thoughts on “Do redeemed women receive glorified male bodies in the afterlife?”

  2. I think that the view of angels being sexless is common in artistic representation. Angels are often shown with mid-length androgynous hair and features. And in children’s Christmas plays the boys are often shepherds and girls play the angels.

    Jack, by “hermaphrodite”, did you mean having both completely functioning sexual systems, or something else?

    Genesis 6:1-4 is often believed to be a story about angels mating with human women to produce hybrid offspring. The book of Enoch and other extra-Biblical texts clearly spell it out that way. In the Bible angels often appear as men, or are mistaken for men.

    Separately:
    1 Corinthians 11:10(NET) For this reason a woman should have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels.
    1 Corinthians 11:10(GNT) On account of the angels, then, a woman should have a covering over her head to show that she is under her husband’s authority.
    1 Corinthians 11:10(NLV) For this reason a woman should have a covering on her head. This shows she respects man. This is for the angels to see also.
    1 Corinthians 11:10 is translated or paraphrased in many different ways, so there is a lot of speculation on what the required “head covering” is actually for, and how it affects the angels.

    Like

  3. If anyone have heard the name Peter Sturges Ruckman now deceased who was an independent KJVO pastor who claimed the KJB would correct the Greek. He also believed that the redeemed women would receive male or at least male-like bodies similiar to the angels. At this point, I cannot say what another which I suspect is also a KJVO pastor with the name of Samuel Gipp believes concerning this matter. Many redeemed true Christians believe that redeemed women will receive incorruptible bodies of their female gender and likewise redeemed men receiving bodies of their gender.

    Like

  4. “Jack, by “hermaphrodite”, did you mean having both completely functioning sexual systems, or something else?”

    Yes, hermaphrodite as in having both male and female sexual organs and functions.

    Like

  5. Jack, is there some reasoning or reference or rationale for why they would be designed that way? Or was it just a childhood assumption or something you were told without being given a reason? I’m curious, because I’d never heard that idea before.

    Like

  6. Reading through the Pentateuch, it is quite obvious that both angels and men have bodies that reflect God’s. A woman’s body- and intrinsic purpose and value- cease to be of importance at the passing of this Age. Sexual organs and the act of procreation are not part of the Kingdom that is to come. Death- and the fail-safe that is procreation- cease.

    What these new bodies look like is largely irrelevant. We’ll find out when we get there. Even if we know now, how does this in any way help our walk, our burden, our struggle against sin? How does it make Salvation any more fruitful? It does not, so waste not the energies or time on trying to understand a promise that will be revealed in its time.

    —

    Jack, commenting on your blog is impossible without signing up on the various platforms you want people to log in with. By design, I am sure, but the commenting policy self-selects for those who are known by Big Tech. This encourages the wrong behavior. Oh, who am I kidding, Big Tech already knows who we all are.

    I remember once in college a (somewhat observant and certainly self-identifying) Jewish dorm-mate, who was part of a conversation about a certain girl, remarked, when it was noted with surprise that he could ever be interested in a non-Jewish girl, that “Christian girls are for practice”. One of the other guys countered by asking him how he knew she was Christian to begin with, and he just shrugged and said “if she isn’t Jewish, and she’s a white girl, she’s Christian as far as I’m concerned”.

    I am not sure Novaseeker is aware of the gravity of his anecdote. A free pass after a condemning admission. Most born-again, self-described Christians are woefully unaware, no- participants, no- apologists even- in their own demise. These people hate you to the point of hating anything and everything that remotely ressembles you. Deflowering your women is no big deal. You are not even cattle. You are ‘only practice’ for who matters. Both the Father (ref:Isiah) and the Son (ref: Romans) have divorced them. This is both ethnic and spiritual warfare, and the aggressor is the only one fighting.

    Like

  7. ikr,

    “Jack, commenting on your blog is impossible without signing up on the various platforms you want people to log in with.”

    [Genuinely confused.] I only know of WordPress and Gravatar. If you are getting other sign in messages, please send me a private message and tell me what is happening.
    sigmaframe(at)protonmail(dot)com

    Like

  8. Angels are not hermaphroditic. They are the SONS of GOD, His firstborn. Not the children of God, not the daughters of God, not the kinda-ambiguous-somethings of God. I would not suggest telling one he had ladyparts.

    Now it’s possible that God created female angels, but I would be stunned if so. I know of none such, nor is there any Scriptural information to bolster that idea. It is such a crucial point that certainly God would have mentioned it via the King and his apostles, or via the prophets.

    Angels are far closer to men in nature and appearance than they are to women. Men and angels are brethren before Father, both groups under the authority of Christ, Father’s chosen son. Angels don’t have to change their appearance when they incarnate here, they simply walk amongst men, because the physical features of the two are so similar — both being modeled on the form of God, although God is not a human being nor an angel. God does not look like men and angels, men and angels look like God, sharing His pneuma and form.

    This is different from angelic possession or influence over a human being, which takes place amongst both sexes. When an angel in spiritual form takes power over a human female, then on earth yes, he will appear female. But the effect of possessing a human female causes a kind of closed-loop blowback, because the angel cannot help likewise absorbing some ‘feminine components’ of the possessed female. Under these atmospheres, and at this hour in history, there are far more angels/demons in the disincarnate state than incarnate. The city skies teem with them at night.

    The angelic spirits that possessed Athaliah and Jezebel, for example, took on certain aspects of femaleness and femininity as a result of both the material possession, and due to the bleeding-in caused by the merging of psycho-spiritual elements. This, I speculate, describes something of the long descending path taken by LucyFer. I believe this feminization to be the result of accretion, not of original creation. But this is not something God told me.

    Upon seeing two angels, the citizens of Sodom were crazed to rape them partly due to the hateful and jealous influence of their demonic master, and partly because angels taking human form usually have certain distinguishing characteristics, which the pagans generally termed puer aeternus. Jung rambled on about this quite a bit, along with the ancients.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. To address the OP’s title, human beings will be sexed and produce children during Christ’s Millennium. After the Millennium, at creation of the new heaven and new earth, I do not believe humans will be sexed ever again, as the biological aspect of procreation is unnecessary, and the form of God’s creation no longer is grounded in duality.

    However, I strongly believe that God will NEVER interchange the human sexes, that God will reach some point when He makes human females into males, whether incarnate or disincarnate as spiritual entities. To do so would degrade His own image. After the Millennium, I don’t think that material reality will consist of the dualities, of the opposites, which underlays the current physical Creation.

    During the Millennium, those who have been given eternal bodies (the spiritual form that Christ is now in) likely will appear as they did on Earth, not only sexed, but displaying in divinized form an approximation of their past appearances, at a sort of peak or perfected state. They will not procreate. In short, you will look like the ‘best you possible’. What of that is retained after the Millennium, I do not know. I don’t even think much about the new heaven and earth, because what Father and Jeshua have cooked up will be way beyond my imaginings.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Matthew 6:21 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
    ikr, I’ve just been thinking and wondering about God’s coming kingdom more lately, and less about my prior worldly ambitions that once drove me. My interest now lies there to a greater degree than ever before. I didn’t used to give it much thought. I’d like to find out all I can about God’s unseen realm. I’m a fan of His, so I want to know all the trivia, even if it serves me no useful purpose, but to delight in pondering it.

    And I didn’t really spend much time planning or writing this particular post, it is mostly just a previous comment of mine along with a cut and paste from a slightly related article by a defiler who works for The Smithsonian.(AKA Satan) Mainly I just wanted to spur discussion on the topic to learn more about it. I’m still in the mental reasoning stage of a few other promised posts, but I thought I’d post this hypothesis up to see if anybody had any more information on the topic.

    Like

  12. Topically relevant, ref: male v female bodies: https://www.dailywire.com/news/vanderbilt-players-cried-when-sarah-fuller-kicked-football-30-yards
    Yet, admittedly irrelevant, ref: Earthly bodies.

    Top 5 quotes:
    5. Sarah Fuller, a fill-in kicker for the men’s Vanderbilt football team last Saturday, booting the ball 30 yards. Amazing? for a woman. Ge 5:2.
    4. That kick, apparently, brought male players to tears. … Really?
    3. “It used to be an insult. … Playing like a girl is a compliment, it’s something you want to strive for.” *chokes on his evening tea* Je 51:30
    2. David Hookstead at The Daily Caller mocked the “PR stunt” of a kick and the apparent crying. Channeling Gretta Tornberg: “How dare you.”
    1. Fuller revealed that she gave the Vanderbilt boys a half-time speech [..] “This is how you get better, by calling each other out for stuff, and I’m going to call you guys out.” From ‘male players’ to ‘boys’. Is 3:12

    Special bonus round:
    !. The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets.

    Is 5:20. Women are men, men are women. There is no difference, except when women should have more spotlight, and should be in charge. Conservatives are feminists.

    Nothing short of a hardcore, pure patriarchy wherein Christ is celebrated by every man, every woman submits to a husband, and children model the behavior of their parents. Where the 3 capital crimes are met with swift executions, where arts and culture reflect God’s taste for beauty. I pray to either experience a glimmer of this before my passing, or that this world is not long for the Son.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Don’t we all hate women in men’s sports and trannys in women’s sports. Its just one more reason not to waste time watching other people exercise.
    ikr, What do you view as the three capital crimes?

    Like

  14. The smoking gun is 1 John 3:2: “Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.”

    So, we don’t know what the details will be. Probably nothing like what we are now. The reason God made male & female in the first place was to demonstrate the spiritual reality of Christ & humanity. Once that spiritual reality arrives, why would we still have the training metaphors? We’ll be spiritually married to Christ, not physically married to each other.

    “Angels are not hermaphroditic. They are the SONS of GOD, His firstborn.”

    They are created, not begotten, to use the Biblical language of John 3:16. Servitors of great power yet no free will as we understand it.

    Like

  15. Gunner Q,
    I was really liking everything about your comment, right up until you claimed that angels have no free will. How on earth did one third of them rebel then? I thought that was clearly an act of free will. Without free will they’d be obedient to their programming like robots.

    Like

  16. In this exposé
    * I have ignored to a maximum a commandment that does not outline a punishment
    * I have focused on where the command is made for execution (= to curse!), and examples of man carrying out the execution.
    This is so that there is no confusion over the parts of the Bible that are metaphorical, versus literal. These capital crimes are literal.
    This exposé is not exhaustive, more could be added.

    What do you view as the three capital crimes?

    Jn 1:1- the Word, the Law, is God
    Ma 3:6, He 13:8- God does not change
    Mt 5:18- the Law is in effect until the consumption of this World
    Mt 5:17- Christ fulfilled the promise of the Law, the Law is in full effect! OT = NT. (see also: Tt 2:13)

    Capital Crime #1: Blasphemy– which includes sorcery, idol worshiping, cursing one’s parents (the father in the family mirrors the Father in the Body), possession
    Ex 22:18, Le 20:9, 14, 27, 24:16, Dt 12:6, 17:2-5, 1 Kg 21:10
    Example: the tribe of the Levi was placed in a position of honor as keepers of the Ark as they did not worship the golden calf and were uniquely the most zealous for fulfilling the capital commandment of blasphemy (Ex 32:28). (The tribe of Levi received a curse for a different sexuality offense)
    God also kills the sons of Aaron and for a sinful offering and Uzzah for touching the Ark. These were blasphemous acts. Yes, I know these are not examples of man carrying out the commandment to execute blasphemy.

    Capital Crime #2: Sexual immorality*– including homosexuality, beastiality, fornication, adultery, pederasty, pedophilia, incest, necrophilia, rape
    Dt 22:20, 27:20, 23, Le 18:22, 20:11-21, 21:9
    Example: 1 Co 5 asserts high sexual crimes and delivering a man’s flesh to Satan, lest his soul be saved. 2 Sa 13 is a great example for handling rape. Tamar cries out (verse 12). Alone, Amnon overpowers her (verse 14). Absalom definitively knew the act occurred (verse 20). David knew the act occurred but had no proof, was not a witness = could not take action (verse 21). Absalom kills Amnon (verse 28).
    *Biblically-defined rape is defined as an unwilling virgin woman who cries out, was defenseless during the act (eg. working the fields). The Wrath is to pass from her onto her rapist (Dt 22:23-25).

    Capital Crime #3: Murder*– which is separate from killing. Key term is ‘bloodguilt’.
    Nu 35:16, Le 24:17, Mt 26:52
    Example: the thief on the cross (Lk 23:42) was forgiven his sins but was made to live out his punishment for his crime. All too often, CINOs conflate forgiveness of sins with absolve-ment from corporal punishment. Your sins are forgiven, but your crime must still be paid. This example does not point to murder~>execution specifically, but rather the justification of execution in general.
    (There is another example in the OT of a man who murdered all of another man’s offspring, and as such the man’s father was denied offspring of his own, eg. they were put to death. I cannot find it in my references, but cannot afford more time to look for it now.)
    *Biblically-defined killing and murder are separated. Defense of oneself, family, home, property is authorized (Ex 22:2) when motives are either clearly hostile or unclear. If the motives can be determined and are not life threatening, then it would be murder (Ex 22:3). A further, clear delineation is made between murder and involuntary manslaughter (killing) providing protection to to perpetrator when it was accidental loss of life (Nu 35:6), however the manslayer does not live a life of freedom- just protection from the retribution for murder (as he did not murder, but there was loss of life).
    “Thou shalt not kill” is a terrible translation of the TR which has caused much error in many Christians along with “turn the other cheek” which is out of context when used in this manner.

    How do we know that capital punishment is very much to be in effect? Re 21:8 tells us that God will finish mopping up the mess of these 3 capital crimes with the Son’s return. Notice, if you will, in this verse, that the cowards (those who know what is right, but fail to do what is right) will be included in those put to death, and Death. (See also: 1 Co 6:9, 1 Tm 1:9)

    Ge 1:28- our first commandment is to take dominion over Creation. We are responsible for upholding the standards set forth in the Bible
    Lv 24:22- the law is to be applied to everyone, without exception, without favor
    1 Tm 1:8- the Law is GOOD, to keep the law. The law is specifically not for those who are good, but those who do evil
    Jn 14:15- Christ says to keep His Commandments if we truly love him. We have reviewed what they are.
    Dt 28- the prophet tells us to keep the commandments, that nations who do so will be blessed by God.

    What would a God-fearing nation do, then, regarding capital punishment?

    *Along with a sedition and treason (which are sound practice in executing Ge 1:28), these 3 crimes would be mandated to be counted in its laws.
    *Everyone who, upon assuming government position in a nation, would be sworn into duty starting with publicly- before men- shouting his allegiance, at his life’s peril, to Jesus Christ, Emmanuel, King of Kings, Son of the Father. Maybe this swearing in could occur monthly, lest they forget Who it is they serve.
    *Justice would be meted out swiftly for all laws, not just those carrying capital punishment. Thorough, swift hearings or male eye witness to the crime. (False witness is to bear the punishment for the crime being alleged.)
    *Executions would done by the hand of those with first-hand knowledge of the crime in the moment, or at the township or municipal level, publicly, after a trial. (You will note in Scripture referenced above that an individual witness on the moment or a town’s elders publicly are commanded to perform the execution.)

    Contrast God’s Law with what we see in the West today:

    1. Capital punishment has been absolved in the UK (1965) and her Commonwealth and largely dormant in the US today.
    2. Those who are on Death Row continue to live for 25+ years
    3. Crimes- all crimes- go unpunished for years
    4. Where capital punishment carried out, it is at state, federal (just reinstated by No45) levels, not at municipal levels
    5. Those who worship false gods or claim there is no God serve in our governments, our militaries, our schools, our institutions.
    6. False witness little to no punishment, especially for protected classes (eg. women, ‘minorities’ et al)

    Anyone who advocates the preservation of someone’s life- for any reason or justification- after committing one of these 3 acts, promotes evil and is a Humanist or Satanist (but I repeat myself) and not of God.

    Like

  17. @ikr: For capital crimes, I think you missed adultery. Although your qualification list had executed by humans. The one example from the Bible that I can think of is David with Uriah’s wife, and even then, God killed the child rather than the criminal (David).

    Since adultery undermines the family unit, adultery is also undermining the church, community and nation. If we enforced God’s commands for marriage this would have a great influence on our nations.

    But what about the nations that ignore God’s laws? Suppose a man’s wife leaves him, commits adultery with other men, and even uses the state’s force to rob her husband of his children, home and monthly salary, what is a good man to do? Or a good man from the community who sees this being done to his friend?
    I understand that a loving husband may want only good things for his wife, whether she is wayward or not. Does God’s law show that certain consequences are necessary to remove the evil from among the community? For example Deuteronomy 19:16-21.
    What should we do when we see this?

    Like

  18. Very good stuff, ikr,

    However the reason I asked, was because I have recently been thinking about:
    Exodus 21:16(AMP) Whoever kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or is found with him in his possession, must be put to death.
    Exodus 21:16(NASB) Now one who kidnaps someone, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall certainly be put to death.
    See also Deuteronomy 24:7

    “Example: the thief on the cross (Lk 23:42) was forgiven his sins but was made to live out his punishment for his crime. All too often, CINOs conflate forgiveness of sins with absolve-ment from corporal punishment. Your sins are forgiven, but your crime must still be paid.”

    Which is why the apocryphal addition of the “Pericope Adulterae”(John 7:53-8:11) into the Gospel of John in the late AD 300’s-400’s, just doesn’t belong in the Bible. It was not inspired or written by the apostle John. It contradicts other scriptures and Christ’s example, like letting Zacchaeus pay back fourfold according to the law. I don’t believe Jesus conspired with some man’s wife, caught in the act of riding another guy’s dick, to cuckold her husband without even a slap on the wrist. Jesus Christ wasn’t evil like that.

    “Anyone who advocates the preservation of someone’s life- for any reason or justification- after committing one of these 3 acts, promotes evil and is a Humanist or Satanist (but I repeat myself) and not of God.”
    God seems to have been merciful and commuted the death sentence from David for murdering Uriah, onto his first son with Bathsheba and David had to repay fourfold as he had demanded in 2 Samuel 12:6. So there can be mercy, but somebody will still have to pay the penalty to fulfill God’s law.

    Like

  19. @JPF

    I believe I included adultery as an example of sexual immorality. Perhaps I missed the Scriptural reference. As I said, the expose is not exhaustive and I had already spent >1h responding to Sharkly’s prompt. I am not applying PhD dissertation rigor to a blog post. You will find it in your heart to forgive me for this, I trust.

    It is possible that David was spared the price of his capital crimes of adultery and murder as he had received God’s anointing. (A reminder that Saul also did not perish by God’s hand- and David also was keen to not raise his hand against Saul. Neither man nor God touched him: Saul fell on his sword.) Why then prophet (mouthpiece of God, during this period of History) Nathan exposed David yet David’s life was not forfeit? I cannot judge, that is not for me to know. I assume it has to do with the anointing, a ‘diplomatic immunity’ of sorts.
    The Bible makes reference to many things that are not spelled out in quantifying detail- just like the title of this thread. Who were the Nephilim? What does the anointing do, exactly? What do our reincarnate bodies look like? etc. (apocryphal books attempt to define these, but I do not subscribe to their authority)
    I do not know. I cannot comment on how someone else has executed, or failed to execute, the commandments. I can, however, know for certain what they commandment is, and the standard by which it should be done. Short of some divine intervention or revelation (hah!), I dance to my card.
    –> I will say that if I was the father of Uriah, him being my son, I would have sought the appropriate Biblical justice to the man who murdered him. Was his father still alive? Many potentials on why this played out the way it did are not included in the Bible.

    How do I execute these items? As I read these commandments, they apply to one’s jurisdiction. My jurisdiction is myself, then my family, then my tribe etc. I am -NOT- responsible for someone else, their family, another tribe. (Altruism is Satanism). My take-away is that I am to execute faithfully that which I understand. As I grow in understanding and faithfulness, more will be revealed to me, as the Spirit deems. If I am faithful in the little things.. I may be installed at a seat of power, but I would be keen to fear God, and keep His Commandments. (Heavy weighs the head who wears the crown).

    If something occurs under my watch- I am either responsible for the just* punishment (*per what God defines), or I become responsible for the crime and the price is mine to pay***.
    * If my son is displaying wayward sexual behavior, it would be better that I strike him while young, severely discipline him, and set him on a new course before that behavior takes root and crosses the line of capital punishment and missed salvation. It would be better he were maimed than be given over. (I trust the King that a change of heart would occur before a maiming would occur- see: Class 001 on Trusting God with Impossible Commandments: The Abraham-Isaac Story)
    * If my neighbor is getting chummy with my wife, it would be better that I nip that in the bud with both her and him, lest she cross that line as well and the transgressions warrant death for the both of them.
    * If I am a regional governor, I execute that which is under my care appropriately.
    * If I am not King, I do not have jurisdiction over the kingdom. That for which I am responsible, I will be held to that higher standard. David, upon return to the throne after exile, took the adulterous concubines, locked them up, and they died childless. Life imprisonment, not execution. Effectively they were put to death, yet David did not faithfully execute the commandment. The result of this disobedience? That is between God and him.

    I look at the gentleman in TX who is having his life ripped apart with his sons taken from him, by a woman who is not their mother- nor by the courts nor by blood- using the courts to keep his 7yo sons from him, and push sexually-altering hormones onto one.
    https://nypost.com/2019/10/23/texas-jury-rules-against-divorced-dad-trying-to-stop-7-year-old-sons-gender-transition/
    The proper course of action is to find his sons, recover his sons, and defend them with his life. Knowing the sexual perversion the state is attempting to enforce, any enforcers are to be deemed hostile actors and bear the price for the crime of sexual perversion. This said, I do not judge him, I am sure his burden is already great.

    I look at the gentleman in FL who found a (thought to be) trusted family friend sexually perverting his 11yo son and beat him to a pulp, calling the cops telling them to hurry if they did not the sexual deviant would be dead before they arrived. He was in a coma when the cops arrived.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2700872/My-son-saved-attackers-life-Father-pounded-admitted-child-molester-bloody-puddle-claims-son-stopped-stabbing-admitted-pedophile-death.html
    Obviously, the guy is an affront before the Father by marking himself with tats, obviously an error trusting someone not of his tribe (sleepovers, public schools, universities et al. discussions for another time) for the care of his flock BUT he kept God’s commandment on this topic! And the courts were wise to avoid incurring God’s wrath by attempting to prosecute or persecute him by ‘taking (God’s) Law into his own hands’.

    It would alarm no Christian who is paying attention that our governments are so perverted almost no law can be faithfully obeyed if Christ is King in our hearts. It begins with faithfully executing the commandments in our lives. Then, expanding as the tribe expands. This is what sets up kings, and failure to do so tears down kings- as our society is given over to a culture that does not fear God. Of one thing we can be certain: God protects, provides for, and rewards those who faithfully keep His Commandments.

    The examples of meting out God’s law in the moment, by a man who witnesses the act was given. Where there is no credible eye witness, a trial is to occur. One of two outcomes for a trial:
    1. the accused is found guilty, and pays the price for the crime
    2. the accuser(s) is(are) found guilty of false witness, and pays the price for the crime
    Woman accuses man of rape? Trial:
    1. man found guilty: executed.
    2. woman found guilty of false witness: executed.
    Man accuses man of theft of sheep? Trial:
    1. accused man found guilty: owes 4 sheep to accuser
    2. accuser man found guilty of false witness: owes 4 sheep to the accused

    I have answered your question about the wayward wife without directly answering, so as to avert censure. Mt 10:16. God’s Laws do not change because a civil government makes following them difficult.

    *** This is the story of the Bible, in its entirety. The punishment for Sin is Death. But God- who IS the Law- is BOUND by Himself, the Law- did not mete out that punishment on man. Thus, He is to bear the price. And then He did, for He so loved the world, that He gave His Only Son. He abandoned, a state of desolation that we- man- are spared, His Son at His Son’s darkest hour on the cross. This sacrifice cost God the Father dearly, but the punishment was required.
    If we are slaves to Christ, then we have no choice on this matter. He paid our price before the Father. The Law must be fulfilled, and Christ demonstrated this fully.
    After this atonement, and only after the price has been paid, may we enter into the Father’s Glory.
    It is precisely this understanding that gives way to the knowledge that love is not hippy feel-good bullshit preached by the World. It is discipline, punishment (as God defines). If this does not give any believer goosebumps, then you do not understand the Father, you do not understand the Sacrifice, you do not understand the necessity of punishment for crime.
    We live under Grace, such that sacrifices for sin are not required. We do not live under Anarchy, where the Law has been abolished. ‘If you love Me, keep My Commandments’

    Liked by 2 people

  20. @Sharkly

    I had not considered the commandment to put to death a kidnapper. You have given me food for thought. As I said, this expose is not exhaustive.

    Perhaps the price- which must be paid- for David’s adultery, was his son as substitution. JPF likely provides the answer. This mirror’s God’s own payment for our sins with His Son. Perhaps a son is a worthy proxy, which may not gel with our Earthly understanding and logic, but if true, would be a further revelation of God’s character.

    Like

  21. On the topic of Christ’s assertion in Mt 5:17-19:

    Christ is demonstrating that the Law applies- always and regardless. His own life- on the cross- is the demonstration that the Law STANDS and IS TO BE FOLLOWED. He is saying the Law was not this made-up thing by the Father, and it was a soft, flexible consideration for His People. He is demonstrating that the Law is for real, then He walks up a hill to His death, to demonstrate the Law must always be fulfilled. And anyone who says differently, will be discounted in the Kingdom, and anyone who holds to and encourages the Law, will be counted great in the Kingdom.

    Our curse as men in Ge 3 is a spirit of cowardice. The Bible is full of great Truth, but it takes a lot of re-conditioning from a spirit of sin and lawlessness, a culture of feminism, a world of humanism to re-brand ourselves as violent soldiers in God’s army. The awesomeness that is God’s Creation, our duty, His Sacrifice, His Commandments is great, and it takes the Spirit’s work for us to be reborn out of that spirit of cowardice and into boldness.

    When the Son returns, He is looking for David’s Mighty 30. He is recruiting a Jericho 300. He will install peace with a rod of iron.

    I understand there are 3 tiers to God’s Law:
    1. Anyone who directly blasphemes the Spirit will not receive Salvation. They are to receive death, and will receive Death.
    2. Anyone who is a blasphemer, sexual deviant, murderer may yet receive Salvation. They are to receive death, but can be spared Death.
    3. All other sins such as theft, driving over the speed limit (hi world!), being ungrateful (hi Job!) may yet receive Salvation and even further blessings (hi Job!) after appropriate reprimand. They are not to receive death, and may be spared Death.

    Like

  22. Re: Ex 21:16

    A woman’s purpose for existing is to provide (in this order) to her man: chastity, sex, children, rearing (a family)
    She is the helper suitable for the commandment given to all Creation in Ge 1:22 to multiply, echo’ed in Ge 1:28 after mankind’s creation.

    A man’s purpose for existing is to take ownership over Creation (Ge 2:20), by toiling (Ge 2:15) in order to provide/protect/discipline his flock ().

    When a woman is raped (as Biblically defined), she is robbed of her ability to fulfill her very purpose. Perhaps, a kidnapped man is too in his equivalent position of being robbed of his fulfillment, thus bearing the same penalty as a woman raped.

    We see men throughout the OT entering into domestic servitude for a lord to pay debts or punishment. Jailing also occurs, yes, but this example of working off one’s societal red balance as an institution is lost today in the West.. and would allow a man to keep working, providing guidance and example and protection to his family if he has one.

    Hardly rigorous, just thinking aloud.

    Also, in my haste, under blasphemy, I neglected to include the most obvious one, despite the proxy example being done: cursing God Himself.

    Like

  23. “How on earth did one third of them rebel then? I thought that was clearly an act of free will. Without free will they’d be obedient to their programming like robots.”

    The devil is on record rebelling (Isaiah 14:12-15) so you’re right that far… but I have trouble believing that a third of the angels joined him. What could they possibly have gained, worshiping the devil instead of the Almighty? Or alternatively, the devil being one of three archangels, every single angel under his command voluntarily following his rebellion? (Revelation 12:3-4)

    God only talks of the devil’s fall from grace in Ezekiel 28:12-19 so my take is that the devil rebelled and the third of heaven under his command followed orders. We certainly haven’t seen any third-party angels, so to speak. But as with everything supernatural, I could be wrong.

    Like

  24. @ikr I believe I included adultery as an example of sexual immorality.

    duh, I was obviously sleeping when I wrote that. Yes, you are of course correct. Adultery is an obvious type of sexual sin.

    Like

  25. Re: Ex 21:16

    Rather than equate this commandment- because it is a commandment on how to govern- to others within the categories that I have identified in my own understanding, it is worth emphasizing that it is a commandment. No matter the rationale, or difficulty in upholding, or , it is to be followed, lest the Son testify we are lukewarm.

    As far as rationale, after having marinated, I think I would still hold to my 3 categories, and shoehorn this into the 3 trends I had identified under ‘murder’- the wrongful taking of one’s life. Kidnapping is symbolic of this- costing a family their son in an undue, premature manner. Alive or dead, he is- in effect- dead to the family who has lost him via kidnapping.

    The malicious machination is different, but the effect on the family is the same. Ergo, it is to bear the same punishment. (Unintended killing via accident on a jobsite- for example- is not malicious, is not murder, so the perpetrator is granted continued life, but in a reduced state of freedom- ‘house arrest’ within a city).

    How’s this for railroading your OP?

    Like

  26. ikr,
    I don’t see you as railroading the OP. The OP, in this case, was sort of just thrown together, to incite conversation, to get brothers, in Christ’s holy patriarchy, discussing matters and sharpening each other. I’d like this blog to function a bit like a true church, where men can discuss and hash out ideas that matter, sharpening each other and engaging in fellowship, where we pray for each other and build each other up in what is true and good. We should talk about what matters to us, and understanding God’s intent and guidance for us, should matter to us, a lot. I’ll try to get a new post up by the end of this weekend.

    I think my coming post will be about how all Affirmative-Action for women is aimed at “correcting” or opposing God intentionally making women weaker vessels, and subjecting them under the rule of men, and is thereby antichristian/satanic. Which seems to be a bit corollary to your statement that, “Altruism is an expression of Satanism.”, that you made over at Princeasbel’s blog.
    I don’t know if you would care to expound upon that statement. It might help me as I finish formulating the above promised post, and then write it. Or, if you’d like to explain that as a post, you can email it to me, and I’ll post it here for you as its own topic for discussion.

    Like

  27. “Kidnapping is symbolic of this- costing a family their son in an undue, premature manner. Alive or dead, he is- in effect- dead to the family who has lost him via kidnapping.”

    And even worse than death, he may be raised up to defy God by the ungodly kidnappers.
    There is a whole societal industry and system of kidnapping children from fathers, and turning them against their father and God the Father.

    Like

  28. As it is in heaven, where every knee shall bow before our Holy Father to swear fealty to His Son of Righteousness, so should it be done on earth. We should give The Ancient of Days glory by honoring fathers who are the Eternal Father’s image, and all men since they are images of the Son. Men should be held in reverence by their wives and children, to show God glory.
    Leviticus 19:32(ESV) You shall stand up before the gray head and honor the face of an old man, and you shall fear your God: I am the Lord.
    Leviticus 19:32(Geneva) Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head, and honor the person of the old man, and dread thy God: I am the Lord.
    Revelation 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come: and worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.

    Like

  29. “Altruism is an expression of Satanism.” [..]
    I don’t know if you would care to expound upon that statement.

    You must enjoy my exposés. You have a sickness.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. ikr,
    Well, lets just say that I have a thirst for truth, wisdom, and knowledge, a pattern of genuine curiosity. It may be incurable. And I hadn’t really heard the sentiment you expressed before. Although it may have been hinted at in the writing of William Bradford that I left in a previous comment.

    I have some books I inherited, that are over a hundred years old, and it seems that in them there is more of a general sense that people should be ranked in society, and that some admirable people are to be emulated while others in society are corrupting trash. They had no desire to empower the corrupted, but thought it best that the wicked and foolish be allowed to suffer natural punishments until such time as they wised up, lest they be a bad example for others of unpunished profligacy. I don’t know if that older mindset is part of what you were getting at, or not. However I do think we’ve lost the concept of the motivating value of climbing up within a properly ranked society. The difficulty is that we as humans tend to rank a person’s merit based upon outward worldly measures, whereas God’s proper metrics for ranking people are harder to discern, and often not appreciated. Saul was tall and probably seemed more kingly than David. But David was much preferred by God.
    A society that operated based upon God’s principles and ranked us based upon God’s metrics would be far more righteous and would tend to incline people towards righteousness.
    Or is it perhaps that your concept is that God’s metrics are not equality, and conformity to Hollywood’s ideals? I’m curious to find out what you meant by that tagline.

    Like

  31. HEY SHARKLY
    Of course women receive eccentualy male bodies in the afterlife!
    &the haiberu or hebrews had more of an effect on egyptian religion than vice versa!
    & also TRUE Chivalry as is also TRUE GODLY ALPHA MASCULINITY is an inherently Christian phenomena.

    Two central tenets of Christianity are 1) A woman must honor and desire and obey her husband and 2) A woman cannot have sex with (nor buttehetxtxt zlozlzozzo) with any other man.

    Feminism teaches the exact opposite of this.
    FEMINAZI-Churchians especialy oppose themselves&CHRIST thru their abombimal ways of churchanity&feminazism!

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment