The previous post gives a link to an online discussion about 'Women Submitting' at GodlyGals. The prevalent views at that forum were that women should submit to their husbands. I don't agree
( Read more... )
Re: Before I bother with the rest of it...susannahJuly 31 2006, 17:29:09 UTC
Hi prophet,
Yes, along with most of the scientific community around the world. But my question is mainly about the subordination of women. (I won't ask you to keep silent... you may talk)
Re: Before I bother with the rest of it...susannahJuly 31 2006, 17:40:44 UTC
Anyway, moving onto the question of female subordination... what are your views? If you got married, would you just accept your husbands decisions if you didn't agree with them... if he said, "Well I'm sorry prophet, I love you very much, but I'm the boss"?
(The previous post did give a link to GodlyGals but has been deleted, perhaps because it was seen as advertising.) However, I still invite comments on the subordination of women. Of course, anyone can serve or be submissive in a relationship, but should they do so as a religious obligation, just because of their gender?
There is a wonderful book out there that I would recommend for you to read. It's called Captivating By John & Stasi Eldridge. It goes into the gifts that God gave to women exclusively and how we are supposed to use those gifts
( ... )
Thank you for the recommendations. Any literature that looks intelligently at ways of enhancing relationships and finding mutual love and respect is potentially much-needed.
Yes, your belief IS biblical. I just don't think the bible is correct about Adam and Eve (except symbolically as a myth) and therefore Paul's 'biblical' statements (which he justifies theologically with Adam and Eve) are a problem to me.
Indeed, however loving the relationship, the idea of subordination of people on the basis of gender is a big problem as far as I'm concerned!
I know you exercising faith in holding to the scriptures, and I know you see the submission thing very much in the context of love and mutual subordination to one another's needs, so I respect your good ideals.
I just question the theological basis that Paul creates to justify his teaching on women.
Well I understand what you're saying and I think it's good to research things you don't understand or don't agree with in order to make an informed decision. Obviously if you disagree with the Adam and Eve being the beginning of creation, then you'll have a problem with Paul's statements.
I believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God and therefore, I can trust it. Those books also use scripture as a basis for facts, so if you don't agree that the Bible is facts, you might not get much out of it. But I'd still recommend reading them...they shed a lot of light on things I didn't quite understand before the reading! Good luck to you!
i don't think we can pick and choose parts of the Bible to be true or untrue. That's not to say I believe in a literal 7 days... I don't really care one way or the other. God is God... If he wanted to take 7 days he could have, or it could be poetry. I'm good with either.
If we can't rely on the Bible to be truthful, we really are relying on our own intuition and knowledge to interpret the mind of God. I think that is a dangerous proposition; to fit God into the box we build in our own heads. How far is that from worshipping and idol?
Here we go. part I - women in the churchhisprophetJuly 31 2006, 17:44:07 UTC
In these verses, Paul cannot be addressing women who were in the ministry, but rather those in the congregation who were out of order. How do we know this? We have many such proofs, many from Paul himself. Here is a partial list of women who were all in influential positions of leadership in the early church
( ... )
Re: Here we go. part II - is identical nature inequality?adr0ckJuly 31 2006, 18:05:14 UTC
Men are told to love their wives as themselves. Women are told to be subject to their husbands. Can you imagine this exchange? Without both, this becomes a broken thing. To treat his wife less than he treats his own self is to violate the Lord's command, and for the wife to refuse humility and wish to 'lord it over' her husband is also against the design.
The wife has no less important or exalted position than the husband, but hers is not as head of the home.
This is not a catch-all idea for every woman and every man, but for husband and wife, and women and men in the church. YES! it is out of balance if either party is not doing what they are supposed to
( ... )
Re: Here we go. part II - is identical nature inequality?hisprophetJuly 31 2006, 18:15:15 UTC
yes! Exactly. You know how good it feels to a man to hear "honey, you decide. I trust you." You know how good it feels for a woman to hear "I'm hungry - are you hungry?" IT's just.. as much as I wanted to stomp my feet upon first hearing about this kind of thing from the Lord, it's TRUE and it WORKS. My husband would not be less than me for opening the door for me. I would be no less than him to go through that door.
problem is that they never take it in context...never never!
first of all, the passage doesnt start where it says *chapter 5* or whatever, the previous statement says that we should submit unto one another. then the subsequent verses explain that concept on deeper terms.
the whole not permitting a woman...not in context. there were issues in that specific church that they were addressing, not the whole of christendom.
and if you remember ananias and his wife both died because he lied to the holy spirit and she submitted to that KNOWING it was lie...they both were punished. i take that as a serious threat. if you know a man is not in the will of God, you don't have to submit to him. everything is to be done in decency and in order, and if your husband isn't doing those things then he has no authority.
Comments 128
Actually we were all descended from apes.
Are you serious?
Reply
Yes, along with most of the scientific community around the world. But my question is mainly about the subordination of women. (I won't ask you to keep silent... you may talk)
:)
Richard
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Yes, your belief IS biblical. I just don't think the bible is correct about Adam and Eve (except symbolically as a myth) and therefore Paul's 'biblical' statements (which he justifies theologically with Adam and Eve) are a problem to me.
Indeed, however loving the relationship, the idea of subordination of people on the basis of gender is a big problem as far as I'm concerned!
I know you exercising faith in holding to the scriptures, and I know you see the submission thing very much in the context of love and mutual subordination to one another's needs, so I respect your good ideals.
I just question the theological basis that Paul creates to justify his teaching on women.
Reply
I believe that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God and therefore, I can trust it. Those books also use scripture as a basis for facts, so if you don't agree that the Bible is facts, you might not get much out of it. But I'd still recommend reading them...they shed a lot of light on things I didn't quite understand before the reading! Good luck to you!
Reply
If we can't rely on the Bible to be truthful, we really are relying on our own intuition and knowledge to interpret the mind of God. I think that is a dangerous proposition; to fit God into the box we build in our own heads. How far is that from worshipping and idol?
Reply
Reply
Reply
The wife has no less important or exalted position than the husband, but hers is not as head of the home.
This is not a catch-all idea for every woman and every man, but for husband and wife, and women and men in the church. YES! it is out of balance if either party is not doing what they are supposed to ( ... )
Reply
You know how good it feels to a man to hear "honey, you decide. I trust you."
You know how good it feels for a woman to hear "I'm hungry - are you hungry?"
IT's just.. as much as I wanted to stomp my feet upon first hearing about this kind of thing from the Lord, it's TRUE and it WORKS.
My husband would not be less than me for opening the door for me. I would be no less than him to go through that door.
Reply
first of all, the passage doesnt start where it says *chapter 5* or whatever, the previous statement says that we should submit unto one another. then the subsequent verses explain that concept on deeper terms.
the whole not permitting a woman...not in context. there were issues in that specific church that they were addressing, not the whole of christendom.
and if you remember ananias and his wife both died because he lied to the holy spirit and she submitted to that KNOWING it was lie...they both were punished. i take that as a serious threat. if you know a man is not in the will of God, you don't have to submit to him. everything is to be done in decency and in order, and if your husband isn't doing those things then he has no authority.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment