- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
Originally posted by jaywillGeneralizations?? ToO cites specific scripture and then follows with a deductive observation, and it's a generalization????
You wrote this:
[b]==============================
For the NT, look at what Paul had to say. For example:
...
Women, like homosexuals, do not fare well in the teachings of Paul. However, I believe neither are discriminated against in the teachings of Jesus.
================================
My point was to add some balance to these ...[text shortened]... inclusive picture of the matter in both the NT as a whole and in Paul's writings specifically.[/b]
NOT.
Originally posted by jaywillIn the passages I cited, Paul instructs that women are to be silent and submissive to males. Females do not fare well in these passages as they are clearly viewed as inferior to males.
You wrote this:
[b]==============================
For the NT, look at what Paul had to say. For example:
...
Women, like homosexuals, do not fare well in the teachings of Paul. However, I believe neither are discriminated against in the teachings of Jesus.
================================
My point was to add some balance to these ...[text shortened]... inclusive picture of the matter in both the NT as a whole and in Paul's writings specifically.[/b]
It is unclear how you view the individual statements of your post as relevant to the above.
For example you said:
"His word that they saints could all prophesy one by one in First Corinthians 14 does not at all seemed to be restricted to males."
You seem to be trying to indicate that prophesy may not be restricted to males, yet in the same chapter Paul clearly states that women are to remain silent. How can they both remain silent and prophesy?
Originally posted by daniel58Well Jesus is not God but that's been discussed many times. Jesus was a male on earth but like his "Father" he is a spirit creature who has no gender. They are only refered to that to help us understand the authority they have as God has always looked to the male gender here on earth to be the dominate one of the two sexes. But women are as equally valued and loved by God as males.
Jesus Is God.
2 edits
Originally posted by BadwaterI think this is a generalization.
Generalizations?? ToO cites specific scripture and then follows with a deductive observation, and it's a generalization????
NOT.
"Women, like homosexuals, do not fare well in the teachings of Paul."
What about Paul instructing husbands to love their wives even as Christ loved the church ?
I think that that is powerful ammunition for Christian women to remind their husbands that they should be willing to lay down their lives for them.
"Husbands love your wives even as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her ..." See Ephesians chapter five.
A passage like this I think should be added to the analysis of the NT's teaching concerning women.
4 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneThe passages are contraversial. But when all things are considered, and all relevant words are taken as a whole I think a few things occur to me:
In the passages I cited, Paul instructs that women are to be silent and submissive to males. Females do not fare well in these passages as they are clearly viewed as inferior to males.
It is unclear how you view the individual statements of your post as relevant to the above.
For example you said:
"His word that they saints could all prophesy one b clearly states that women are to remain silent. How can they both remain silent and prophesy?
1.) Paul was taking about his personal practice - "I do not permit a woman to excercise authority over a man".
Now Paul's personal practice should not be ignored completely. However, I think the balance is to remember that he speaks as HIS personal custom.
2.) I think that not speak must be refering to not authoritatively defining Christian doctrines.
3.) Paul mentioned a female name Junia as a woman who was noted among the apostles. It is hard for me to believe that she never spoke.
4.) He mentions that the couple - Prisca and Aquila as being exemplary. They risked their lives for him and the gospel work. Curiously he mentions the woman's name FIRST in (Romans 16:3).
Paul wrote very purposefully. There must be a reason why he placed the woman's name ahead of her husband's.
5.) We should not consider that whoever speaks in the church has all the authority. TOO MANY churches would have collapsed if it had not been for the fervent and faithful prayers of Christian sisters.
6.) Paul does say that the head of the woman is the man. But he goes on to add that the Head of man is Christ. I take that to mean that Christ is the Head of every human, ie. man = male and female.
Personally, I would rather have the enfluence to move the hand of God and touch His throne in prayer than to speak 100 sermons in a church meeting.
One day well know how much of the will of God was accomplished on the earth because of the powerful prayers of praying women as opposed to the heady sermons of men.
Aside from this if anyone doubts that God used women to teach also in church history they should read a book like "God's Plan of Redemption" by Mary E. McDonough or some of the early writings of Mrs. Jesse Penn Lewis.
2 edits
Originally posted by jaywillA passage like this I think should be added to the analysis of the NT's teaching concerning women.
I think this is a generalization.
[b]"Women, like homosexuals, do not fare well in the teachings of Paul."
What about Paul instructing husbands to love their wives even as Christ loved the church ?
I think that that is powerful ammunition for Christian women to remind their husbands that they should be willing to lay down their lives for them ge like this I think should be added to the analysis of the NT's teaching concerning women.[/b]
What I posted was not meant as an "analysis of the NT's teaching concerning women".
You took it out of context. HoH was speaking about how "the bible, particularly the OT has a rather dim view of women".
I was pointing him towards where the NT has a rather dim view of women also. Paul seemed like a good place to look for this as women do not fare well with him.
think you will find it says women and children to have there say but not to rule over men. "Pauls writtings". as jesus never mentioned it we take pauls teachings. the 3 marys, marther and a few others who followed jesus were beloved by him but seems to be as maids, either to cry washing his feet, oiling him and being the first to see the risen christ.
4 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne================================
[b]A passage like this I think should be added to the analysis of the NT's teaching concerning women.
What I posted was not meant as an "analysis of the NT's teaching concerning women".
You took it out of context. HoH was speaking about how "the bible, particularly the OT has a rather dim view of women".
I was pointing him towards where the ...[text shortened]... n also. Paul seemed like a good place to look for this as women do not fare well with him.[/b]
I was pointing him towards where the NT has a rather dim view of women also. Paul seemed like a good place to look for this as women do not fare well with him.
==================================
And I still disagree with the generalization.
And if I wanted to be biased I could make the case that he didn't care for men.
That some cultural norms of the time and place influenced his attitude some, I will not disagree with.
I think a woman would fare far better sending her husband to be counseled by Paul then she would sending him to anyone else I can think of.
4 edits
Originally posted by jaywillYou really can't see Paul as having had a dim view of women when he taught that women are to be silent and submissive to males in church? Are you really so blind to discrimination based on gender? Even if it was "influenced" by "cultural norms" is it not a bigoted attitude? Were racists no less racist when they were "influenced" by "cultural norms"?
[b]================================
I was pointing him towards where the NT has a rather dim view of women also. Paul seemed like a good place to look for this as women do not fare well with him.
==================================
And I still disagree with the generalization.
And if I wanted to be biased I could make the case that he di g her husband to be counseled by Paul then she would sending him to anyone else I can think of.[/b]
Paul was taking about his personal practice - "I do not permit a woman to excercise authority over a man".
This argument is problematic on so many levels.
1) Is it your position that when bigotry is taught as a "personal practice" that it's no longer bigotry?
2) You took this verse out of context to make your point:
11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.
He lapsed into first person in one of the verses, however the surrounding verses are not in first person and he even used scripture to support his bigotry.
Also, the passage from 1 Corinthians 14 was not at all written in first person and taught similarly.
3) Is it your position that all letters or portions of letters that Paul wrote in first person are not to be viewed as viable instruction?
4) If you consider all scripture to be "divinely inspired", it would make little sense for you to view portions of it as "personal practice".
Paul does say that the head of the woman is the man. But he goes on to add that the Head of man is Christ. I take that to mean that Christ is the Head of every human, ie. man = male and female.
1 Corinthians 11
3 But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.
If Paul were speaking of "man" as in "humankind" then the reference to "woman" would be superfluous. Clearly this is not the case. Paul taught that there is a hierarchy: God -> Christ -> Man -> Woman. This is consistent with the passages I cited earlier where "A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness."
It is clear that Paul viewed females as inferior to males.
Originally posted by Hand of HecateThis thread is moot.
"And a man will choose...any wickedness, but the wickedness of a woman...Sin began with a woman and thanks to her we all must die" Ecclesiasticus, 25:18, 19 & 33. 1
"And I find more bitter than death the woman, whose heart is snares and nets, and her hands as bands: whoso pleaseth God shall escape from her; but the sinner shall be taken by her." ...[text shortened]... do our Spirituality Christians feel about women?
And yes, I'm looking at you daniel58.
Ecclesiasticus, 25:18, 19 & 33. 1 does not exist.
2 edits
Originally posted by ThinkOfOnenope, its only problematic when you dont understand its implications. It is merely, as so much of Pauls writings are, procedural, for the sake of harmony within the structure of the congregation.
You really can't see Paul as having had a dim view of women when he taught that women are to be silent and submissive to males in church? Are you really so blind to discrimination based on gender? Even if it was "influenced" by "cultural norms" is it not a bigoted attitude? Were racists no less racist when they were "influenced" by "cultural norms"?
[ veness."
It is clear that Paul viewed females as inferior to males.
You will note that there were no females chosen as apostles, was Christ discriminating, let me here you say it thinkofone, was he, hardly. You will note that after the death of Christ, the apostles formed a governing body, to which decisions of great importance were referred, there were no female members. were the apostles being discriminatory, hardly. When Paul on his missionary journeys appointed men to be overseers in the congregations, there were no female members, after the model set by Christ and the apostles, discriminatory, hardly.
so let me hear you say it think of one, if Paul, basing his model on that of the Christ and the apostles, entertained discrimination on the basis of gender, then you shall publicly admit that Christ and the Apostles were also being discriminatory. let me here you say it.