Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 41 to 47 of 47

Family Forum discuss The woman takes her husband's last name - biblical? in the The Christian Walk forums; Originally Posted by Christusregnat Kim, Here are some examples of the basic way of surnaming a married woman: [ snip] Notice in each case, that ...

  1. #41
    Kim G's Avatar
    Kim G is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Christusregnat View Post
    Kim,

    Here are some examples of the basic way of surnaming a married woman:

    [snip]

    Notice in each case, that the "second name" to describe who this woman is identifies the woman with her husband; this is the function of our surname, and reflects Eve's identity as Mrs. Adam, and the church's identity as the Mrs. The Lamb.
    Thanks for correcting me. (That's why I added "right?" at the end of my sentence. I guess I should edit it to say "wrong!")
    Kim G
    Mitchell Road Presbyterian Church
    Greenville, SC

    Teach me Your way, O LORD; I will walk in Your truth; Unite my heart to fear Your name.
    Psalm 86:11

  2. #42
    Archlute's Avatar
    Archlute is offline. Puritanboard Senior
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    Quote Originally Posted by Kim G View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Archlute View Post
    I always get a kick out of the false dichotomy brought about when people attempt to argue that something is either cultural and therefore of little consequence or biblical and therefore we should take it more seriously. Culture is never neutral, it is either more biblical or less biblical in how it has been influenced. Dismissing something as being unimportant to change/reclaim under the guise of it being "merely a part of Western culture, etc." shows more the negative impact of modern missiology than it does a Christian view of culture. That view would say, "It is both Western and correct, because the Western view is, in this instance, founded on a Christian view of life while the Asian culture is wrong at this point, because it is a cultural practice founded on principles that are devoid of Christian knowledge."
    I understand what you're saying. However, you can only take it so far. What you are presenting I would consider a "false dichotomy"=everything is either Christian or non-Christian. In ancient Asia, women wore pants and men wore robes. In the West, men wear pants and women (traditionally) wear skirts. Neither is a Christian vs. non-Christian view of life. It's just . . . clothing styles. Same with types of food eaten, traditional music styles, etc. Unless maybe you wouldn't consider this neutral.

    In the Bible, I would have been called Kim, daughter of Ken. Upon getting married, I STILL would have been Kim, daughter of Ken, not Kim, wife of Josh, right? So maybe the biblical precident is that the daughter retains the name of her father.
    No, you would still have been called Kim, the wife of Josh; see Gen. 24:15, 36:10, etc.
    Archlute

  3. #43
    Archlute's Avatar
    Archlute is offline. Puritanboard Senior
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    2,175
    Guess I got there a bit late.
    Archlute

  4. #44
    Christusregnat's Avatar
    Christusregnat is offline. Puritanboard Professor
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,165
    Kim,

    I took it as a question, and my response more of an answer than correction, but thanks for confirming your intent

    Cheers,

    Adam


    Quote Originally Posted by Kim G View Post
    Thanks for correcting me. (That's why I added "right?" at the end of my sentence. I guess I should edit it to say "wrong!")
    Adam B., Old Dominion, RPCNA

    Ratio immutabilis facit praeceptum immutabile

  5. #45
    Christusregnat's Avatar
    Christusregnat is offline. Puritanboard Professor
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,165
    Hate it when that happens!



    It is nice when two responses are the same though...

    Quote Originally Posted by Archlute View Post
    Guess I got there a bit late.
    Adam B., Old Dominion, RPCNA

    Ratio immutabilis facit praeceptum immutabile

  6. #46
    MrMerlin777's Avatar
    MrMerlin777 is offline. Puritanboard Postgraduate
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,168
    Not that it realy mattered to me at the time, but when my wife and I married, she took my name and kept her middle name dropping her maiden name entirely.

    She's quite comfortable with that discision and as we have grown more covenantal over the years she finds it to be appropriate as she is no longer under her father's headship but mine.

    Just the way things have worked out in the Jacobs' household anyway.
    Donald Jacobs
    Roanoke VA.
    Covenant Reformed Episcopal Church.

    Cum vero infirmor tunc potens sum.

  7. #47
    Mushroom's Avatar
    Mushroom is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    6,293
    Johnnie Cochranesque
    Is that one in the lexicon yet?
    Brad

    PCA

    These toadies just keep holdin' me down, man!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72