Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Faith and other YEC: why even bother taking part in the discussion?
nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 121 of 141 (245141)
09-20-2005 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 120 by jar
09-20-2005 10:36 AM


Re: Yes that's the way it should be
See, at least you are up front and honest about it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by jar, posted 09-20-2005 10:36 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by jar, posted 09-20-2005 10:40 AM nator has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 122 of 141 (245142)
09-20-2005 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 121 by nator
09-20-2005 10:38 AM


Re: Yes that's the way it should be
I wouldn't go that far.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by nator, posted 09-20-2005 10:38 AM nator has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 123 of 141 (245153)
09-20-2005 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 119 by nator
09-20-2005 7:54 AM


Re: Interpretation
The Bible says that Men should treat their wives like christ treated the church. Christ died for the church. (and everyone else)
Men should be willing to let their ego die for their wife.
Then...maybe she will want to love him and serve him a little bit.
Once he becomes humble as Christ is humble.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by nator, posted 09-20-2005 7:54 AM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by nator, posted 09-20-2005 4:00 PM Phat has not replied

sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 124 of 141 (245181)
09-20-2005 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by nator
09-20-2005 7:54 AM


Re: Interpretation
shnrafinator
A wife is supposed to treat her husband like he is God
Yeah I get that from my wife whenever we make out.OH God Oh god...
A wife is supposed to be as submissive to her husband as a man is submissive to God
That explains why I spend so much time in the doghouse. I coulda been a Christian,but,NOoo I had to ruin things for myself and be a fool atheist.Truth be told,though,I have a wife who puts up with my shit and that is no small feat I asssure you. Most times I think there should be honors bestowed upon the ladies in our lives because it is obvious to me over the years that I having recieved far more than I have given.
I think I am going to suprise her with a bouquet of flowers today.Least I could do being as I just broke something,
This message has been edited by sidelined, Tue, 2005-09-20 11:23 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by nator, posted 09-20-2005 7:54 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 125 of 141 (245231)
09-20-2005 4:00 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by Phat
09-20-2005 11:40 AM


Re: Interpretation
quote:
Men should be willing to let their ego die for their wife.
Then...maybe she will want to love him and serve him a little bit.
I have no problem loving and serving my husband because he also loves and serves me.
We have a reciprocal partnership in which each of us comes to the relationship as an adult person, who love and want the best for each other.
I really don't see how a marriage between adult people can be any other way.
If you get into these strict gender roles and "the wife must willingly submit" bullshit it seems to stop being a relationship between equals.
And how can you want to be married to someone inferior to you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by Phat, posted 09-20-2005 11:40 AM Phat has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 126 by Nighttrain, posted 09-20-2005 6:45 PM nator has replied

Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 126 of 141 (245305)
09-20-2005 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 125 by nator
09-20-2005 4:00 PM


Re: Interpretation
Think of it like a skipper and a crew of one, Schraf. As long as the crew knows her place and does her job obeying the captain, the ship will weather the storms of life. :-P
Edited to give my smilies equal time
This message has been edited by Nighttrain, 09-20-2005 06:52 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 125 by nator, posted 09-20-2005 4:00 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by nator, posted 09-20-2005 7:14 PM Nighttrain has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2170 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 127 of 141 (245318)
09-20-2005 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 126 by Nighttrain
09-20-2005 6:45 PM


Re: Interpretation
quote:
Think of it like a skipper and a crew of one, Schraf. As long as the crew knows her place and does her job obeying the captain, the ship will weather the storms of life.
...and that it's "natural" that only people with brown hair make good captains, and that people with blonde hair are "naturally" submissive and obedient to people with brown hair.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 126 by Nighttrain, posted 09-20-2005 6:45 PM Nighttrain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by jar, posted 09-20-2005 7:16 PM nator has not replied
 Message 130 by Nighttrain, posted 09-21-2005 2:20 AM nator has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 128 of 141 (245319)
09-20-2005 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by nator
09-20-2005 7:14 PM


Right again!!!!
And Brown hair with Hazel Eyes dominates ALL!

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by nator, posted 09-20-2005 7:14 PM nator has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Omnivorous, posted 09-21-2005 5:28 PM jar has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 129 of 141 (245324)
09-20-2005 7:33 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by nator
09-20-2005 7:54 AM


Re: Interpretation
The word isn't "subservient," Schraf. It says "submit to" your husband; it doesn't mean you are his slave, it means you are to serve him in love, willingly -- and he's to do the same toward you.
...and yet the Bible has been interpreted for millenia to mean that women should be subservient to their men.
Quotes please. From MAJOR Christian sources.
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church;
This quite clearly lays out the hierarchy:
1) God
2) Husband
3) Wife
A wife is supposed to be as submissive to her husband as a man is submissive to God.
That is true. It is a hierarchy of authority, not tyranny.
A wife is supposed to treat her husband like he is God.
Like he is God.
No, she is not to submit if he leads in a way that is contrary to God.
Are you saying that men are not completely subservient to God? So why shouldn't a woman be completely subservient to her husband, and live her life thinking only about his wishes, worhipping him and seeking to to obey him in all things? Isn't that what we are supposed to do for God?
Like he is God.
Huh?
Women ARE chattel in the Bible, faith, you can't deny that.
In the Old Testament they are. That was the way of life in the Middle East. It is a result of the Fall. It is not dictated by the Bible, it is not God's will, merely reported as a fact. Jesus Christ, however, changed things. He is God and demonstrates God's true will. It was revolutionary for Him to speak to women as He did, to include them in His circle, to speak to foreign women especially, and prostitutes. His disciples were often a bit flummoxed by his behavior in that way, because they had been brought up under the old idea that women are chattel and foreigners no better than dogs. But though women are now equal to men, we are not equal in authority and are given a different role to play.
So, why do you disregard the Bible where the owning of women (and slaves) is concerned, but follow it with regard to denying women pastors?
The Bible does not approve of slavery, it merely tolerates it and tries to tame it. Slavery is a part of the fallen nature same as mistreating women is. But the hierarchy of authority goes back to the Creation, it is not a part of the Fall, it was merely twisted by the Fall.
No, only to her husband, not to all men, and yes in all things to her husband, though the word, again, is not "subservient." Somehow that implies she is forced to do menial things at his command, but that's not the idea at all.
Where does it say that this is not the idea in the Bible?
At least in the command to husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church.
I can see nothing in the Bible that states or implies that doing menial things at her husbands command is excluded.
A bossy commanding manner is excluded by the above command to love their wives, but menial labor has to be done in any case, and certainly a lot of that had to be done by all until a century ago anyway.
But it IS sexism, just like discriminating against people of a different race than you is racism. You just accept it as OK.
I completely disagree. The natural differences between male and female physical strength and functions are obvious, and different roles for the two make sense.
So, the reason women are to submit to their husbands is because they are physically weaker?
No, I didn't say it was a "reason" for anything, I said it just to emphasize that the sexes are different from each other in many ways, in contrast with the racial example you gave, where there is no difference.
What if I showed you a husband and wife where the man is physically weaker than the wife; does this mean that he should "obviously" be submissive to her?
See above. It's not a "reason" for anything. You read that into what I said.
And besides, you aren't talking about "different" roles.
You are talking about a power hierarchy in which the husband is always more powerful than the wife.
You believe that muscle strength, size, and sexual organs make a person more able to perform a task (preaching) that has nothing to do with muscle strength, size, and sexual organs, because the Bible says so. That's religiously-based sexism.
Well, now you are off on a tear based on your misreading of my mention of the physical differences between the sexes which I did not give as the REASON for anything.
There are no natural differences between races.
Sure there are. Groups of people evolved in vastly different climates, and so have certain physical traits which are "natural differences". Those which have lived in very sunny places for millenia have developed lots of protective melanin in their skin, while people who have lived in less sunny and colder places for millenia lost much of this melanin so they could get enough Vitamin D from the sun.
Those are circumstantial differences, not natural differences in the sense I obviously meant it. Those are differences like the trait differences between parents and children, but I was talking about fundamental differences.
Also, people from hot climates have flat noses with wide-flared nostrils which allows for greater cooling of the air coming in, while those from cooler climates have narrower noses with smaller openings to allow for greater warming of the air coming in.
Also, people from warmer climates tend to be lanky and lean with, to better dissipate heat from their skin, while those who evolved in cold climates are shorter and stockier to better conserve body heat.
These are natural differences, no?
The word was ambiguous. My mistake.
The sexes are equal in human status, different in role and spheres of authority and responsibility.
==========
Who is the most important person in a Christian religious community.
Jesus Christ.
This message has been edited by Faith, 09-20-2005 07:36 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by nator, posted 09-20-2005 7:54 AM nator has not replied

Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 130 of 141 (245394)
09-21-2005 2:20 AM
Reply to: Message 127 by nator
09-20-2005 7:14 PM


Re: Interpretation
Dunno, cobber, most of the blondes I met were pretty feisty.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by nator, posted 09-20-2005 7:14 PM nator has not replied

Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 131 of 141 (245422)
09-21-2005 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by Faith
09-19-2005 12:32 PM


Think Deborah would disagree?
But in the case of preachers, the pastors of a congregation, I believe the Bible teaches clearly that that is a role reserved for men only.
How would this stand with such prophetesses as Deborah, Miriam, Hulda, or Noadiah?
Does God really speak to women knowing that they are not allowed to preach? This really doesn't make sense to me.
I know feminists consider this sexism, but it's about role, not about ability. Women are to use the same ability in other contexts.
You mean like the ability to lead Israel in the way that Deborah did, or the way that Jael spiked Sisera's head?
I don't think you give women enough credit, they are as capable as men, especially when it comes to preaching which requires no real physical exertion.
Christian men must feel so powerful to know that they have a nice slave at home waiting for them.
Anyway, I do not see how you can harmonise the belief that women are not to preach, the Bible certainly doesn't support it being a male only area.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Faith, posted 09-19-2005 12:32 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Faith, posted 09-21-2005 10:27 AM Brian has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 132 of 141 (245458)
09-21-2005 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by Brian
09-21-2005 7:55 AM


Re: Think Deborah would disagree?
But in the case of preachers, the pastors of a congregation, I believe the Bible teaches clearly that that is a role reserved for men only.
=============
How would this stand with such prophetesses as Deborah, Miriam, Hulda, or Noadiah?
Does God really speak to women knowing that they are not allowed to preach? This really doesn't make sense to me.
As I understand it, and have been trying to get across, it is a matter of church government more than anything else, of authority or responsibility rather than a prohibition on preaching and teaching as such, but I have some questions too about how this should be played out.
I know feminists consider this sexism, but it's about role, not about ability. Women are to use the same ability in other contexts.
========
You mean like the ability to lead Israel in the way that Deborah did, or the way that Jael spiked Sisera's head?
As I said, it is not about ability. Women have the ability. And there are special contexts too. When there are no men capable of leading, then a woman who has the ability leads instead.
I don't think you give women enough credit, they are as capable as men, especially when it comes to preaching which requires no real physical exertion.
Again, this isn't about ability and I don't know why my having said it many times already isn't getting across. Women have the ability to hear from God and convey His word. It's about role and authority in government of the church.
Christian men must feel so powerful to know that they have a nice slave at home waiting for them.
This is the complete opposite of what I've been saying but I guess you prefer your own view so I don't see any point in repeating mine.
Anyway, I do not see how you can harmonise the belief that women are not to preach, the Bible certainly doesn't support it being a male only area.
I did NOT say at any point that women are not "to preach." I said they are not to have authority over a congregation, to BE in the official responsible ROLE of preachers and pastors of the church. And I admit I still have some questions myself about where women's talents in preaching are to be used in the church. Some women obviously have more of these gifts than some of the men who have the responsible roles in the church, but if it's a matter of role and not ability, then it's a matter of determining the right context for women's giftings to be of use in the church and I have questions about this. Some churches believe that women are to use such gifts in teaching women and children only. I don't think that is all that clear in scripture. But overall it seems right and biblical that men should head the church as leaders and overseers.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by Brian, posted 09-21-2005 7:55 AM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 138 by nator, posted 09-22-2005 8:51 AM Faith has replied

Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 133 of 141 (245550)
09-21-2005 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by jar
09-20-2005 7:16 PM


Hazel power
jar writes:
And Brown hair with Hazel Eyes dominates ALL!
That's been my experience, too, though I may soon have to rely on the power of hazel eyes alone.
Christ, I suppose, must have been black-haired and black-eyed with swarthy skin, but it's hard to find a Christ like that in Western churches or minds.
The gender roles in the Bible seem equivalent to the ritual dress, dietary, and purification laws--customs and mores of desert tribes elevated to the status of religious tenets.
Of course, most Christians feel those annoying thread counts and baby back rib bans can be ignored, but for some reason the gender oppression (and everything else that cements existing power structures) remains obligatory, every husband a mini-Pope: some Borgias, some John Pauls, some former Young Nazis.
Maybe it's a safety measure. If women preachers abused their status and started sleeping their way through the congregation as so many male evangelicals famously have, the competing male congregants might resort to violence, given our greater strength and God-of-War like mastery. Can't have that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by jar, posted 09-20-2005 7:16 PM jar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by Nighttrain, posted 09-21-2005 5:59 PM Omnivorous has replied

Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3994 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 134 of 141 (245554)
09-21-2005 5:59 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by Omnivorous
09-21-2005 5:28 PM


Re: Hazel power
Christ, I suppose, must have been black-haired and black-eyed with swarthy skin, but it's hard to find a Christ like that in Western churches or minds.
Woddya sayin`--Jesus ain`t white?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Omnivorous, posted 09-21-2005 5:28 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Omnivorous, posted 09-21-2005 6:09 PM Nighttrain has not replied

Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 135 of 141 (245559)
09-21-2005 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by Nighttrain
09-21-2005 5:59 PM


Re: Hazel power
Nighttrain writes:
Woddya sayin`--Jesus ain`t white?
Carpenter's tan.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Nighttrain, posted 09-21-2005 5:59 PM Nighttrain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by jar, posted 09-21-2005 6:14 PM Omnivorous has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024