CCGR
Member
yes it is not inside the bible but shown in Egyptian heilogriffics (i have no idea how to spell that!)
Kidan
Moderator
mpty--The crime of Adam was failure to obey God's commands. It was through HIM that sin entered the world, and likewise the punishment of sin is passed down through the generations (death)
Medjai-- Actually there are people who blame Christianity for Hitler's actions.
BigJ--No women are not second class citizens. But rather, those verses are telling that church, that their women should not be gossiping, or blurting out questions during the service. Whether you (and NOW) like it or not, there is a order in this world, where it goes God->Christ->Man->Woman
God is above us all, Christ is the bridegroom of the church. Man is the head of the household, and he is supposed to treat his wife the way Christ treats the church. Woman is supposed to be in submission to the head of her family, like all Christians are in submission to Christ and God. Yet for the spiritual, and physical worlds outside the home, man and woman are the same. The Bible teaches that there is no male or female in God's eyes.
Children growing up like their parents has nothing to do with free will. Even the bible makes it plan that this happens. "Raise up your children right, and they will not depart from your ways." (Paraphrase, this is found in proverbs)
Christ will only come with a sword at the end times, when the wrath of God is finally poured out upon the earth. During His first visit, He came teaching peace, love, acceptance. Read His teachings. There is no hatred. Yes He said that families would turn against one another. And this happens, I know someone that whose parent's haven't talked to him in over 4 years because he became a Christian. Not from his lack of trying, but rather they see him as abandoning the faith.
Our New Covenant is the covenant of grace. Nowhere does it say that the Law does not apply, yet we are not bound by it in the same manor as the Jews. We should be attempting to live a life within the law, for that is how Christ lived His life. Yet if we fail, or if there's something that we don't, or are not able to do, or even just don't know about the law, then we are not blamed for that sin...
gotta go to work, i'll finish this later.
Medjai-- Actually there are people who blame Christianity for Hitler's actions.
BigJ--No women are not second class citizens. But rather, those verses are telling that church, that their women should not be gossiping, or blurting out questions during the service. Whether you (and NOW) like it or not, there is a order in this world, where it goes God->Christ->Man->Woman
God is above us all, Christ is the bridegroom of the church. Man is the head of the household, and he is supposed to treat his wife the way Christ treats the church. Woman is supposed to be in submission to the head of her family, like all Christians are in submission to Christ and God. Yet for the spiritual, and physical worlds outside the home, man and woman are the same. The Bible teaches that there is no male or female in God's eyes.
Children growing up like their parents has nothing to do with free will. Even the bible makes it plan that this happens. "Raise up your children right, and they will not depart from your ways." (Paraphrase, this is found in proverbs)
Christ will only come with a sword at the end times, when the wrath of God is finally poured out upon the earth. During His first visit, He came teaching peace, love, acceptance. Read His teachings. There is no hatred. Yes He said that families would turn against one another. And this happens, I know someone that whose parent's haven't talked to him in over 4 years because he became a Christian. Not from his lack of trying, but rather they see him as abandoning the faith.
Our New Covenant is the covenant of grace. Nowhere does it say that the Law does not apply, yet we are not bound by it in the same manor as the Jews. We should be attempting to live a life within the law, for that is how Christ lived His life. Yet if we fail, or if there's something that we don't, or are not able to do, or even just don't know about the law, then we are not blamed for that sin...
gotta go to work, i'll finish this later.
LionOfJudah
Member, Dreamcast Fishing Guru
ok Big J the place where you can find the scripture i mention is 15:13-16
M
major
Guest
hitler was a mentally ill genius, He was a military genius, he knew that without an excuse there was no army behind him. He started by pretty much brain washing teenagers to believe what he said. In no place in the Bible does it justify murdering, now in Proverbs it does say "there is a time for war and a time for peace" but killing the Jews that were not fighting back was murder and is clearly controdicting the Bible.
God created Adam knowing he was going to sin. Sure God could have made us like robots walking around that can do no wrong but how could we truely worship God unless it was our choice to worship him? In Genesis it says we are made in God's image. Now let me assure you I look nothing like God. Most Christians believe God doesn't even have a physical form so maybe I'm like him mentally. ERRRRRRR WRONG, I am nowhere near omnicient. Maybe I am like him socially, wait a second, I dont' think so. Maybe I am like him spiritually, lets see, I worship God, does God worship God. No. The only option left is that we have a choice to do as he says or not. It makes us unique.
God created Adam knowing he was going to sin. Sure God could have made us like robots walking around that can do no wrong but how could we truely worship God unless it was our choice to worship him? In Genesis it says we are made in God's image. Now let me assure you I look nothing like God. Most Christians believe God doesn't even have a physical form so maybe I'm like him mentally. ERRRRRRR WRONG, I am nowhere near omnicient. Maybe I am like him socially, wait a second, I dont' think so. Maybe I am like him spiritually, lets see, I worship God, does God worship God. No. The only option left is that we have a choice to do as he says or not. It makes us unique.
M
major
Guest
and kidan i think your little statement has a few flaws, it should probably be God = Jesus > Man > or = woman. Just because men are the rulers of the household doesn't make them better or more important.
Kidan
Moderator
major, I put the > sign between God an Christ, because Christ, while on this earth, was in submission to God's decree's (see His prayer in the garden prior to His trial)
Also I didn't say that men are more important than women. Just that men are the heads of the household, and likewise, in matters of the church and in matters of the house, the woman should be in submission to the man, as they are both in submission to Christ. And likewise the man should treat his wife as Christ treats the church.
Also I didn't say that men are more important than women. Just that men are the heads of the household, and likewise, in matters of the church and in matters of the house, the woman should be in submission to the man, as they are both in submission to Christ. And likewise the man should treat his wife as Christ treats the church.
M
Medjai
Guest
Having the woman in submission to the man is making her a second class citizen.
Tell me, why exactly should the woman be in submission to the man of the household?
Tell me, why exactly should the woman be in submission to the man of the household?
major said:[b said:
[b said:
Hmmm...what about all those Caananites slaughtered by the Israelites? I mean, you can argue that God did it, but that he did it through them.
(Please don't mistake what I am saying...I truely believe that all of you out there would not murder.)
The jews called down the curse of killing Jesus in John. This was used to justify anti-semitic acts throughout Europe, including (parts of) the Spanish Inquisition, Russian Pograms, and culminating with Hitler killing them.
Matt 27:25 "All the people answered, 'Let his blood be on us and on our children!'"
1 Thessalonians 2:14-16 "For you, brothers, became imitators of God's churches in Judea, which are in Christ Jesus: You suffered from your own countrymen the same things those churches suffered from the Jews, who killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets and also drove us out. They displease God and are hostile to all men in their effort to keep us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved. In this way they always heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of God has come upon them at last."
Acts 3:13-15 "The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus. You handed him over to be killed, and you disowned him before Pilate, though he had decided to let him go. You disowned the Holy and Righteous One and asked that a murderer be released to you. You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this."
Acts 18:6 "And when they [Jews] opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles."
Jews as "Jesus Killers"
Acts 5:30 , 7:51-52, 10:39
Jews are otherwise evil
Acts 13:45-46, 17:13
On the other side of the coin...Hitler also killed homosexuals. According to Leviticus, he was justified in doing that.
[b said:
[b said:
Genesis 3:16
[b said:
Well, I would call that a "submissive" position, ergo second class citizenship.
[b said:
1 Cor.14:34-36
[b said:
So, it is OK for men to do all these things? Or do you feel that men don't gossip or ask questions?
[b said:
1 Cor.11:3
[b said:
Right.
Look, you have the right to believe what you want, as do I. My only real beef with this is that many Christians I have met try to play it down. Even you, with your apologetics about women godssiping in church...even though the bible never mentions gossiping.
You will earn a genuine "Big J Gold Star" (which is worth absolutely nothing) if you will take a stand:
1-God says that it is OK to take virgins for your own use.
2-A woman's place is lower than a man's, and that a wife should submit to her husband, period.
[b said:
In heaven, yes. On earth? I ask for a reference to that one. If that is so, then why the above "women should shut up in church" passage?
[b said:
Sure it does. You are saying that the children would grow up like their parents. Perhaps if Moses and the Jews adopted them, they could have their genitals mutilated and become jews. And yes, then I would be bringing up that Moses was a kidnapper as well as a murderer and rapist.
[b said:
Nice to see the arrogance.
I have read the Bible. I have studied Jesus' teachings. Frankly, nothing new or original. "Love God, Love your neighbor?" Try confuscius and Buddha.
[b said:
Sorry, but tyhe whole he who loves his family more than me thing kind of kills the ideal of the cristian family.
And I know a nice gal whose mother hate her because she's an atheist.
[b said:
Was that Paul or Jesus? Once again, Jesus never said that. Where did Jesus say that circumcision is an option? That Lobster is ok to eat? Pork?
[b said:
Considering that it's in the Old Testament...what is that excuse?
Typical "atheist" humor:
Just remember what happens on the wedding night.[b said:
And a few more passages on the inferiority of women:
Eph.5:22-24 "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing."
Col.3:18 "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord."
1 Tim.2:11-15 "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing
1 Pet.3:1 "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands."
CCGR
Member
What About Those Who Say Christianity Promotes Male Domination over Women?
By Douglas Groothuis
AN OBSTACLE HINDERS MANY SOULS FROM TRUSTING IN JESUS AS THEIR HOPE for this life and the next. Many modern women have felt the anguish of being treated as second-class citizens in a man's world. They have been stereotyped and marginalized by men who fail to see their real abilities and understand their real desires. Because many women have been discriminated against unfairly because of their gender, they justifiably complain of the sting of sexism.
Christians should be sensitive to these problems, since God calls us to respect everyone equally on the basis of the truth that we are all created in the image of God (Genesis 1:28), to love our neighbor as ourselves (Matthew 19:19), and to recognize our unity and equality in Christ (Galatians 3:26-29). Yet sadly, many women see the Bible itself as justifying the mistreatment of half the human race. A few years ago I wrote an essay for a campus newspaper that responded to an editorial by a young goddess worshiper named Lia Salciccia. The woman's article was provocatively titled, "Christianity Fails to Honor Women,"1 and represented the thinking of scores of people who reject the gospel because they believe the Bible is sexist.
Several charges are often leveled against the God of the Bible. Many non-Christian feminists claim that the God of the Bible is male. If God is male, then men are more like God than women. Therefore, men have a God-like authority over women in a way analogous to God's authority over his creation. This devalues and disempowers women who, because of their gender, will never have the privileged status of men. Salciccia wonders how Christian women put up with it. "Do they enjoy following a religion governed by a book that says they are inferior?" she asks. "When these woman pray to God is it a man's face that they see?"2 Some feminists also complain that since the Incarnation of God occurred in the form of a man, Jesus, this God cannot properly relate to women's experience. Because of these problems with Christianity, they say, women must turn to a feminine understanding of the divine, the Goddess. Hence the bumper-sticker: "Thank Goddess."
Goddess religion takes many forms. Generally speaking, it rejects male- dominated religious practices and centers on ancient pagan practices that revere the earth and its energies, often drawing on unreliable prehistoric sources to fashion a suitable spirituality for women today.3 Goddess religion rejects the notion of God as a distant Creator who sends his male emissary (Jesus) to the world. Instead it worships the Goddess as the divine power and presence that permeates the universe. Salciccia says, "If I can choose my own deity. . . . I will choose one I can relate to, one which is reflected by all living things, including my very female self."4 The goddess, however, is not a personal deity. Despite the references to "She" and "Mother," this deity is really nothing more than an impersonal force, principle, or source that is embedded in nature. The goddess is more of a metaphorical or poetic idea than a literal or actual being.
In rebutting these charges against the God of the Bible, I will highlight several points that pertain to Jesus.5 Those drawn to the goddess must come to terms with the real Jesus, not a sexist caricature. First, the God of the Bible is not male in any sense. God is not a sexual being. Jesus taught that God is spirit (John 4:24) and not one who brings things into existence through procreation. God is not to be represented as either a male or a female (Exodus 20:4; Deuteronomy 4:16). The Bible does refer to God as our Father, but as theologian Alister McGrath explains: To speak of God as father is to say that the role of the father in ancient Israel allows us insights into the nature of God, not that God is a male human being. Neither male or female sexuality is to be attributed to God. Indeed, sexuality is an attribute of the created order that cannot be assumed to correspond directly to any such polarity within the creator God himself.6
Scripture refers to God as "he" and Jesus called God his Father, not to emphasize masculinity against femininity, but to highlight that God is a personal and powerful being. Unlike the idea of the goddess, the biblical God is a knowing, willing, holy, and loving personal agent who reveals himself in the Bible and through becoming a human being in Jesus Christ. In the cultures to which the Bible originally came, men had more authority than women. Although the Bible does not sanction sexism or the marginalization of women, it used the terms and concepts that would best communicate God's position of prestige, and his role as our protector and provider.
Nevertheless, the Bible uses feminine imagery when it speaks of God as giving birth to Israel (Deuteronomy 32:18) and the Christian (James 1:18). Jesus said he longed to gather rebellious Israel to himself as a mother hen gathers her chicks (Matthew 23:37-39). These kinds of metaphors reveal that although God is not a sexual being, he possesses all the qualities that we appreciate in both men and women, because God is the giver of every good and perfect gift (James 1:17).
Second, Jesus did not set up a male-dominated religious system in which women would be permanently subjugated. He surprised his followers by teaching theology to women in private and in public (John 4:7-27; 11:21-27, Luke 10:38-42) at a time when women were excluded from such affairs. Although he esteemed the family, Jesus stipulated that a woman's principal purpose in life is not reducible to motherhood and domestic work but is found in knowing and following God's will (Luke 10:38-42; 11:27-28). Jesus also appeared to Mary after his resurrection and appointed her as a witness to his world-changing event--in a time when the witness of a woman was not respected (John 20:17-18; Matthew 28:5-10). His model of leadership was based on mutual service and sacrifice, not hierarchical authority structures: "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles LORD it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave--just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many (Matthew 20:25-28).
In addition, in the early church women served as prophets (Acts 2:17-18; 21:9) and teachers (Acts 18:24-28). Paul clearly articulated the equality of believers when he said, "You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, and you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:26-28).7
Third, the incarnation of God in Jesus does not imply that God is male or that God excludes or devalues women. For God to manifest himself in person as a human being, he would have to be either a male or a female. He could not be both simultaneously. However, the most important fact about Jesus was not his maleness (although maleness enabled him to gain respect in ancient, patriarchal Jewish culture), but his holy humanity and identification with the entire human race. As McGrath says, "The fact that Jesus was male, the fact that he was a Jew...all these are secondary to the fact that God took upon himself human nature, thereby lending it new dignity and meaning."8 Jesus understands us all from the inside out: "For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet without sin." (Hebrews 4:15). Although Jesus lived in perfect harmony with the Father and the Holy Spirit, when he joined the human family he knew what it was like to suffer and feel pain, even as we do. During the day of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him (Hebrews 5:7-9).
Those who gravitate toward the goddess because of the problems they perceive with the God of the Bible should realize that Jesus Christ died for the sins of the world, including the sins that men commit against women. Jesus neither endorses nor excuses any sin, but calls everyone to repent of sin and accept him as her Savior, Master, and Friend (John 15:15). An impersonal principle, power, or presence romantically called the goddess can be no one's friend, let alone their Savior. Despite the sentimental use of feminine language, one cannot relate personally to an impersonal power.
While goddess religion is speculatively reconstructed from the dark recesses of prehistory, the drama of Jesus is enshrined in datable, space-time, human history. God has a human face, the visage of Jesus. His story has spoken to countless millions of women and men worldwide for the last two thousand years--and continues to speak to us today.
http://www.gospelcom.net/ivpress/groothuis/WhatAboutMale.htm
By Douglas Groothuis
AN OBSTACLE HINDERS MANY SOULS FROM TRUSTING IN JESUS AS THEIR HOPE for this life and the next. Many modern women have felt the anguish of being treated as second-class citizens in a man's world. They have been stereotyped and marginalized by men who fail to see their real abilities and understand their real desires. Because many women have been discriminated against unfairly because of their gender, they justifiably complain of the sting of sexism.
Christians should be sensitive to these problems, since God calls us to respect everyone equally on the basis of the truth that we are all created in the image of God (Genesis 1:28), to love our neighbor as ourselves (Matthew 19:19), and to recognize our unity and equality in Christ (Galatians 3:26-29). Yet sadly, many women see the Bible itself as justifying the mistreatment of half the human race. A few years ago I wrote an essay for a campus newspaper that responded to an editorial by a young goddess worshiper named Lia Salciccia. The woman's article was provocatively titled, "Christianity Fails to Honor Women,"1 and represented the thinking of scores of people who reject the gospel because they believe the Bible is sexist.
Several charges are often leveled against the God of the Bible. Many non-Christian feminists claim that the God of the Bible is male. If God is male, then men are more like God than women. Therefore, men have a God-like authority over women in a way analogous to God's authority over his creation. This devalues and disempowers women who, because of their gender, will never have the privileged status of men. Salciccia wonders how Christian women put up with it. "Do they enjoy following a religion governed by a book that says they are inferior?" she asks. "When these woman pray to God is it a man's face that they see?"2 Some feminists also complain that since the Incarnation of God occurred in the form of a man, Jesus, this God cannot properly relate to women's experience. Because of these problems with Christianity, they say, women must turn to a feminine understanding of the divine, the Goddess. Hence the bumper-sticker: "Thank Goddess."
Goddess religion takes many forms. Generally speaking, it rejects male- dominated religious practices and centers on ancient pagan practices that revere the earth and its energies, often drawing on unreliable prehistoric sources to fashion a suitable spirituality for women today.3 Goddess religion rejects the notion of God as a distant Creator who sends his male emissary (Jesus) to the world. Instead it worships the Goddess as the divine power and presence that permeates the universe. Salciccia says, "If I can choose my own deity. . . . I will choose one I can relate to, one which is reflected by all living things, including my very female self."4 The goddess, however, is not a personal deity. Despite the references to "She" and "Mother," this deity is really nothing more than an impersonal force, principle, or source that is embedded in nature. The goddess is more of a metaphorical or poetic idea than a literal or actual being.
In rebutting these charges against the God of the Bible, I will highlight several points that pertain to Jesus.5 Those drawn to the goddess must come to terms with the real Jesus, not a sexist caricature. First, the God of the Bible is not male in any sense. God is not a sexual being. Jesus taught that God is spirit (John 4:24) and not one who brings things into existence through procreation. God is not to be represented as either a male or a female (Exodus 20:4; Deuteronomy 4:16). The Bible does refer to God as our Father, but as theologian Alister McGrath explains: To speak of God as father is to say that the role of the father in ancient Israel allows us insights into the nature of God, not that God is a male human being. Neither male or female sexuality is to be attributed to God. Indeed, sexuality is an attribute of the created order that cannot be assumed to correspond directly to any such polarity within the creator God himself.6
Scripture refers to God as "he" and Jesus called God his Father, not to emphasize masculinity against femininity, but to highlight that God is a personal and powerful being. Unlike the idea of the goddess, the biblical God is a knowing, willing, holy, and loving personal agent who reveals himself in the Bible and through becoming a human being in Jesus Christ. In the cultures to which the Bible originally came, men had more authority than women. Although the Bible does not sanction sexism or the marginalization of women, it used the terms and concepts that would best communicate God's position of prestige, and his role as our protector and provider.
Nevertheless, the Bible uses feminine imagery when it speaks of God as giving birth to Israel (Deuteronomy 32:18) and the Christian (James 1:18). Jesus said he longed to gather rebellious Israel to himself as a mother hen gathers her chicks (Matthew 23:37-39). These kinds of metaphors reveal that although God is not a sexual being, he possesses all the qualities that we appreciate in both men and women, because God is the giver of every good and perfect gift (James 1:17).
Second, Jesus did not set up a male-dominated religious system in which women would be permanently subjugated. He surprised his followers by teaching theology to women in private and in public (John 4:7-27; 11:21-27, Luke 10:38-42) at a time when women were excluded from such affairs. Although he esteemed the family, Jesus stipulated that a woman's principal purpose in life is not reducible to motherhood and domestic work but is found in knowing and following God's will (Luke 10:38-42; 11:27-28). Jesus also appeared to Mary after his resurrection and appointed her as a witness to his world-changing event--in a time when the witness of a woman was not respected (John 20:17-18; Matthew 28:5-10). His model of leadership was based on mutual service and sacrifice, not hierarchical authority structures: "You know that the rulers of the Gentiles LORD it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave--just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many (Matthew 20:25-28).
In addition, in the early church women served as prophets (Acts 2:17-18; 21:9) and teachers (Acts 18:24-28). Paul clearly articulated the equality of believers when he said, "You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, and you are all one in Christ Jesus" (Galatians 3:26-28).7
Third, the incarnation of God in Jesus does not imply that God is male or that God excludes or devalues women. For God to manifest himself in person as a human being, he would have to be either a male or a female. He could not be both simultaneously. However, the most important fact about Jesus was not his maleness (although maleness enabled him to gain respect in ancient, patriarchal Jewish culture), but his holy humanity and identification with the entire human race. As McGrath says, "The fact that Jesus was male, the fact that he was a Jew...all these are secondary to the fact that God took upon himself human nature, thereby lending it new dignity and meaning."8 Jesus understands us all from the inside out: "For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet without sin." (Hebrews 4:15). Although Jesus lived in perfect harmony with the Father and the Holy Spirit, when he joined the human family he knew what it was like to suffer and feel pain, even as we do. During the day of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions with loud cries and tears to the one could save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him (Hebrews 5:7-9).
Those who gravitate toward the goddess because of the problems they perceive with the God of the Bible should realize that Jesus Christ died for the sins of the world, including the sins that men commit against women. Jesus neither endorses nor excuses any sin, but calls everyone to repent of sin and accept him as her Savior, Master, and Friend (John 15:15). An impersonal principle, power, or presence romantically called the goddess can be no one's friend, let alone their Savior. Despite the sentimental use of feminine language, one cannot relate personally to an impersonal power.
While goddess religion is speculatively reconstructed from the dark recesses of prehistory, the drama of Jesus is enshrined in datable, space-time, human history. God has a human face, the visage of Jesus. His story has spoken to countless millions of women and men worldwide for the last two thousand years--and continues to speak to us today.
http://www.gospelcom.net/ivpress/groothuis/WhatAboutMale.htm
Kidan
Moderator
Genesis 3:16. That is the woman's punishment. That is where the concepts of the woman being in submission comes from. It's actually a burden for the man BECAUSE HE FAILED by standing there and allowing Eve to eat the fruit. Man is responsible for ensuring his wife and household are responsible Christians and upstanding citizens. And why does submission automatically mean "second-class"? If you have a job, you are in submission to your boss (he tells u what to do, an u do it) Does that make the employee a second-class citizen?
Ok, for Corinth, and Ephesus (the same teaching from Timothy) These are Greek churches. And among the Greeks public women were disreputable. For a woman to speak in public would cause the remark that she was shameless. Virtuous women were secluded. Hence it would be a shame for women to speak in the church assembly. It is noteworthy that there is no hint of such a prohibition to any churches except Grecian. Paul did not want anyone to have reason against the church (They already had enough, as Christians were still being beat, imprisoned and matryed at this time).
For Gossip : PRverbs 10:18, 16:28, 25:33 an many others in proverbes.
Romans 1:29, 2 Cor 12:20
I wasn't trying to be arrogant, rather I'm just saying that Christ didn't teach hatred, rather he taught love. As for your friend's mom, that is not Christian behaviour. She should love her daughter and show her daughter love. Not ostracize her.
1) Just because Moses said something doesn't mean it was necessarily from God. Jesus said that Moses allowed divorce because the Jew's hearts were so hardened.
2)Yes, women should be in submission to her husband or father but that does NOT mean that women are second class
[b said:
Ok, for Corinth, and Ephesus (the same teaching from Timothy) These are Greek churches. And among the Greeks public women were disreputable. For a woman to speak in public would cause the remark that she was shameless. Virtuous women were secluded. Hence it would be a shame for women to speak in the church assembly. It is noteworthy that there is no hint of such a prohibition to any churches except Grecian. Paul did not want anyone to have reason against the church (They already had enough, as Christians were still being beat, imprisoned and matryed at this time).
For Gossip : PRverbs 10:18, 16:28, 25:33 an many others in proverbes.
Romans 1:29, 2 Cor 12:20
I wasn't trying to be arrogant, rather I'm just saying that Christ didn't teach hatred, rather he taught love. As for your friend's mom, that is not Christian behaviour. She should love her daughter and show her daughter love. Not ostracize her.
1) Just because Moses said something doesn't mean it was necessarily from God. Jesus said that Moses allowed divorce because the Jew's hearts were so hardened.
2)Yes, women should be in submission to her husband or father but that does NOT mean that women are second class
[b said:
[b said:
It does while I am at work. But then again, I can walk away from my job. If a woman walks away from her husband, she's a sinner.
Women are little more than slaves to their husband's will. The man is the one in power; just as children are under their parents, so are wives submissive to their husbands. Not co-equal, not a partner.
Look, a couple is either partners or one is in power. In a christian family, the husband has the final say, period. No discussion, no working ity out, no win-win situations, the man's way or the highway.
[b said:
My impression was that Adam was elsewhere when Eve was tempted to eat the fruit.
And please share how you get it was punishment on the man, specifically where God said that. Man was punished in other ways, having to till the ground and such. But I fail to see where the Bible says that woman's pain is a problem for man.
Gal 3:28
Great. That seems to be in heaven.
On to the women in church thing.
IF the Greeks were against women speaking in public, then why would Paul need to forbid it?
Also, it wasn't outside the church, but inside the church. So you are saying that they were Christians, they were too intolerant to allow women to speak, still?
Romans 1:29 & 2 Cor 12:20 & PRverbs 10:18, 16:28
doesn't mention women specifically. Talking about people in general.
Didn't find Prov 25:33.
[b said:
uh huh. Double standard. How am I supposed to know which parts are supposed to be followed and which are not?
God changes/never changes his mind.
Either the Bible is right or it isn't.
Either the bible is the literal word of god or it isn't
At least take a stand. Don't be lukewarm or god will spit you out. (Revelation 3:16 "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.")
[b said:
Fine. Then they are just supposed to obey the man.
So, lets say I come home and I'm horny. My wife is tired and says no. I tell her too bad and force her onto the bed and have sex with her...spousal rape.
God says I did nothing wrong? Or did I?
Thaddius
Member
"Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and He is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband" (Ephesians 5:21-33).
Submission to a husband does not mean a woman is to be a slave in bondage to that man, but rather it is to be a mutual submission in love. The above scripture says we are to submit unto each other. Submission means to yield or "to set yourself under." From this definition we see we are to yield to one another instead of demanding our own way. Love should be the rule in our homes, and we should "prefer one another." Not only should this be especially true in our homes, but in our church family as well.
"Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything" (Ephesians 5:24). The word "everything" here is not inclusive of evil things. Women are to submit to their husbands as the church is to submit unto Christ. Christ would never ask anything of the church that was not according to God's Word. Women are never to submit unto things that do not line up with God's Word.
I would have to say that forcing someone to have sex with you (wife or not) is not within the will of God. It is strictly for self serving pleasure. Rape is rape, no matter how you look at it.
Cory
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband" (Ephesians 5:21-33).
Submission to a husband does not mean a woman is to be a slave in bondage to that man, but rather it is to be a mutual submission in love. The above scripture says we are to submit unto each other. Submission means to yield or "to set yourself under." From this definition we see we are to yield to one another instead of demanding our own way. Love should be the rule in our homes, and we should "prefer one another." Not only should this be especially true in our homes, but in our church family as well.
"Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything" (Ephesians 5:24). The word "everything" here is not inclusive of evil things. Women are to submit to their husbands as the church is to submit unto Christ. Christ would never ask anything of the church that was not according to God's Word. Women are never to submit unto things that do not line up with God's Word.
[b said:
I would have to say that forcing someone to have sex with you (wife or not) is not within the will of God. It is strictly for self serving pleasure. Rape is rape, no matter how you look at it.
Cory
I've been reading the posts, but I don't have much time to keep up with contantly having to post...but I just gotta sneak my thoughts in here on this one.
Submission is not a "Do this or die, woman!" That is clearly not what is meant. As was mentioned before, the husband is supposed to be like Christ. Christ led by serving. I have had great managers over my 10+ years of work. They were great because they led by being a servant to their team.
Husbands need to listen to their wife and take what they say as input. Men and women think totally differently. Add on top of that our individual upbringing and the way we see the world, and you have different points of view on everything. Where one person is weak, the other may be strong. No matter what, it is a 100% partnership relation where the husband is gentle, loving, and considerate of his wife, and the wife is gentle, loving, and considerate of her husband.
True, in the end, I believe it is ultimately the husband's decision, but that just means he has a much bigger responsibility to keep up. If a decision goes sour, the husband is responsible. He needs to take it upon himself.
If you took a poll of a thousand women, I'd suspect the majority will want a husband who will take care of them, supply their needs, and protect them. That does not in any way make women a second class citizen. It's just the difference in the make up of men and women.
Submission is not a "Do this or die, woman!" That is clearly not what is meant. As was mentioned before, the husband is supposed to be like Christ. Christ led by serving. I have had great managers over my 10+ years of work. They were great because they led by being a servant to their team.
Husbands need to listen to their wife and take what they say as input. Men and women think totally differently. Add on top of that our individual upbringing and the way we see the world, and you have different points of view on everything. Where one person is weak, the other may be strong. No matter what, it is a 100% partnership relation where the husband is gentle, loving, and considerate of his wife, and the wife is gentle, loving, and considerate of her husband.
True, in the end, I believe it is ultimately the husband's decision, but that just means he has a much bigger responsibility to keep up. If a decision goes sour, the husband is responsible. He needs to take it upon himself.
If you took a poll of a thousand women, I'd suspect the majority will want a husband who will take care of them, supply their needs, and protect them. That does not in any way make women a second class citizen. It's just the difference in the make up of men and women.
M
Medjai
Guest
The husband is supposed to be like Christ...
Why is it that several posters have admitted that men are not like Christ, though they may try to be. Ergo, as a result, woman are still mistreated through this system.
The woman must submit, as a result it doesn't imply 'Do this or die, woman!'. It simply means that the woman is duty bound (by the will of God) to submit completely to the man, as he is the 'head'. The head governs the body, do you see the symbolism? The head (which holds the brain) is where all decisions are made, such as to move one's arm. So, the man is symbolically in control of the woman (via from what I gather).
Tell me how you define a second-class citizen, because this is how I define it:
One who's decisions and choices are of a secondary nature in that whether or not they are considered (even if they are) leaves no room for their involvement in the finality of a choice. That of a Monarch in relation to those he rules over is an example of a first class citizen (the monarch, the husband) whereas his 'subjects' are exemplary of what could be seen as a second class citizen (the people he rules, the wife).
A wife could say that she believes a child needs to be disciplined, the husband could consider her view, but ultimately if he decides to the contrary, no disciplining will occur. This exemplifies the image of the 'head' whereas the wife could merely be seen as (and in some cases not even as this) an advisor to the monarch (the husband).
Why is it that several posters have admitted that men are not like Christ, though they may try to be. Ergo, as a result, woman are still mistreated through this system.
The woman must submit, as a result it doesn't imply 'Do this or die, woman!'. It simply means that the woman is duty bound (by the will of God) to submit completely to the man, as he is the 'head'. The head governs the body, do you see the symbolism? The head (which holds the brain) is where all decisions are made, such as to move one's arm. So, the man is symbolically in control of the woman (via from what I gather).
Tell me how you define a second-class citizen, because this is how I define it:
One who's decisions and choices are of a secondary nature in that whether or not they are considered (even if they are) leaves no room for their involvement in the finality of a choice. That of a Monarch in relation to those he rules over is an example of a first class citizen (the monarch, the husband) whereas his 'subjects' are exemplary of what could be seen as a second class citizen (the people he rules, the wife).
A wife could say that she believes a child needs to be disciplined, the husband could consider her view, but ultimately if he decides to the contrary, no disciplining will occur. This exemplifies the image of the 'head' whereas the wife could merely be seen as (and in some cases not even as this) an advisor to the monarch (the husband).
M
Medjai
Guest
Another example would be the wife telling a child to go to his room and the father telling the child to sit on the couch. The Biblical direction of authority would infer that the child should listen to the father. Thus his authority is 'higher' than hers. When one has authority over another, that person is at a higher level of 'citizenship' and as such those under that person are second-class citizens in relationship to him.
Avesther
New Member
- I don't normally get into debates on these topics, I don't know why I tried, so I withdraw my reply -
Edited by CndBacon 11:22pm
Edited by CndBacon 11:22pm