Women. Religion’s longest running victims.

[GreatestIam]

You're obviously not married, because you have no idea what you're talking about.

Second wife and 4 boys.

Thanks for your argument along with your denial.
It just shot me down. Not.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

As a Christian married woman, no one has made me a victim. No one has attempted to make me a victim. Victim is not in my vocabulary. On the other hand, I grieve for Muslim women.

They follow the same Abrahamic theology that you do.

He shall rule over you.

If this was a Christian church, you could be told to shut up by your husband and he would have the backing of scriptures.

Log - kettle.

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

"But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (I Corinthians 11:3)

"For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man." (I Corinthians 11:8-9)

"Let the women 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." (I Timothy 2:11-14)

"If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silvers, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days." (Deuteronomy 22:28-29)

"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." (Ephesians 5:22-24)

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." (I Corinthians 14:34-35)

"A silent and loving woman is a gift of the Lord: and there is nothing so much worth as a mind well instructed. A shamefaced and faithful woman is a double grace, and her continent mind cannot be valued." (Eccles. 26:14-15)

"Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean." (Leviticus 12:2)

"But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days." (Leviticus 12:5)


Yep, only Muslim women are considered inferior (ahem - sarcasm).

Well done.

Regards
DL

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Do you know what it means for a Christian to be the head? It means he becomes a servant. We are to rule as Christ ruled the Church, and that is through service. It is through service that we gain power. It's one of the fundamental paradoxes of life.

And tell me, how many women "head" your church? Zero? Hmm...

 

[Coloradomtnman]

"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." (Ephesians 5:22-24)

the most misunderstood text in the Bible....did you know that in the original Greek, the verb for verse 22 is actually found in verse 21 "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ."

literally verse 22 should read "women, do this by...." and verse 25 "men, do this by....." and 6:1 "children, do this by....."

Clarify.

 

[Avatar4321]

Do you know what it means for a Christian to be the head? It means he becomes a servant. We are to rule as Christ ruled the Church, and that is through service. It is through service that we gain power. It's one of the fundamental paradoxes of life.

And tell me, how many women "head" your church? Zero? Hmm...

I think you missed the point of the scriptures. Being the head doesn't make you a ruler over others, being the head makes you a servant.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

From "Dogma":

"You're saying God's a woman?-

Was there ever a doubt in your mind?

He's always referred to as "Him."

That's not how I wrote it.
But one of the drawbacksto being intangible...
is that you have no sayin the editorial process.
The people that held the pensadded their own perspective...
and all the penholders were men.
So She became a He.Doesn't stop with God either.
The whole book's gender-biased.
A woman's responsiblefor original sin.
A woman cuts Samson coif of power.
A woman asks for the headof John the Baptist.
Read that book again.
Women are painted as bigger antagoniststhan the Egyptians and Romans combined.
It stinks."


Christianity has it in for females. Not surprising really. Early Catholic church seeking to dominate the conversation eliminated the fledgling Christian movements which allowed female clergy putting their patriarchal system in control of everything. Judaism too but much less since we recognize 7 female prophets, and acknowledge God with both male and female pronouns, as well as recognize female prophets as superior to men in prophesy ability.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

But mt.man, You forgot what makes a Christian woman want to put her husband in that position:

Ephesians 5:25
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her

Husbands, do that ^ and you'll have her around to cleave to for a long time.

And speak up in Church. Unless you have been going to a soothsayer and are reciting prophecy from her instead of God. If so, then be quiet in church. Your revelations aren't coming from God, and Paul is concerned you'll lead the church astray.......

So if I love my wife the way Christ loved the church, she will then submit to me in all matters, just as she should according to God's Law?

And she shouldn't speak in church, including teaching, or especially teaching, unless she is prophesying because Paul is afraid women may lead the church astray? Do I have that right? Seems like men have done plenty to lead the many different sects of Christianity astray every which way.

Sounds more like a patriarchal, male-dominated, gender-inequality thing to me.

But, however you want to justify the treatment of women by the early, mid, and late, and modern Church.

Who was the first female Pope? Who is the female leader of any Christian sect?

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Do you know what it means for a Christian to be the head? It means he becomes a servant. We are to rule as Christ ruled the Church, and that is through service. It is through service that we gain power. It's one of the fundamental paradoxes of life.

And tell me, how many women "head" your church? Zero? Hmm...

I think you missed the point of the scriptures. Being the head doesn't make you a ruler over others, being the head makes you a servant.

Ok, let me rephrase: how many women are "heads that make them servants" for your church? How many women church leaders? None. Thanks.

Bad job avoiding the question.

 

[GreatestIam]

From "Dogma":

"You're saying God's a woman?-

Was there ever a doubt in your mind?

He's always referred to as "Him."

That's not how I wrote it.
But one of the drawbacksto being intangible...
is that you have no sayin the editorial process.
The people that held the pensadded their own perspective...
and all the penholders were men.
So She became a He.Doesn't stop with God either.
The whole book's gender-biased.
A woman's responsiblefor original sin.
A woman cuts Samson coif of power.
A woman asks for the headof John the Baptist.
Read that book again.
Women are painted as bigger antagoniststhan the Egyptians and Romans combined.
It stinks."


Christianity has it in for females. Not surprising really. Early Catholic church seeking to dominate the conversation eliminated the fledgling Christian movements which allowed female clergy putting their patriarchal system in control of everything. Judaism too but much less since we recognize 7 female prophets, and acknowledge God with both male and female pronouns, as well as recognize female prophets as superior to men in prophesy ability.

Indeed and literalists never look at the paradox of the androgynous God that thy used to create Jesus. Logically,as female, as spoken of at the end of this clip.



Regards
DL

 

[alpine]

Human kind survived and thrived over "specialization" on different tasks. And it all started by woman and man specializing on different tasks. Man hunting, woman gathering. This makes a society much more efficient.

The draw back was, the roles in work split, so did the roles in society, for almost 100.000s of thousands of years.

Of course religions see man as superior to woman and favor them, because religions are not some "fancy" god but us, and our cultures we live in are making them up, with our own rules and regulations.

No wonder why woman rights movements are aligned with the industrialization and scientific/technological advancements. The more woman can contribute, the more freedom and equality she will ask for and get. Factories needed woman, and woman needed factories.

So, if you are an oil rich country and don't really need your woman to "gather" anything for you, because west will pay handsomely for your oil, than you can keep as many woman as you can afford in the house, don't allow them to simply do anything, and they will not ask for any rights or freedom in return.

But if you are not that "lucky" and need your woman to give you a shoulder, in return, she will ask for her fair share of everything; money, freedom, respect...

Rule of the nature...

 

[GreatestIam]

Human kind survived and thrived over "specialization" on different tasks. And it all started by woman and man specializing on different tasks. Man hunting, woman gathering. This makes a society much more efficient.

The draw back was, the roles in work split, so did the roles in society, for almost 100.000s of thousands of years.

Of course religions see man as superior to woman and favor them, because religions are not some "fancy" god but us, and our cultures we live in are making them up, with our own rules and regulations.

No wonder why woman rights movements are aligned with the industrialization and scientific/technological advancements. The more woman can contribute, the more freedom and equality she will ask for and get. Factories needed woman, and woman needed factories.

So, if you are an oil rich country and don't really need your woman to "gather" anything for you, because west will pay handsomely for your oil, than you can keep as many woman as you can afford in the house, don't allow them to simply do anything, and they will not ask for any rights or freedom in return.

But if you are not that "lucky" and need your woman to give you a shoulder, in return, she will ask for her fair share of everything; money, freedom, respect...

Rule of the nature...

IOW. Men will not do or give justice and equality unless or until forced to do so.

Do you see that as a plus for men?

Regards
DL

 

[alpine]

Human kind survived and thrived over "specialization" on different tasks. And it all started by woman and man specializing on different tasks. Man hunting, woman gathering. This makes a society much more efficient.

The draw back was, the roles in work split, so did the roles in society, for almost 100.000s of thousands of years.

Of course religions see man as superior to woman and favor them, because religions are not some "fancy" god but us, and our cultures we live in are making them up, with our own rules and regulations.

No wonder why woman rights movements are aligned with the industrialization and scientific/technological advancements. The more woman can contribute, the more freedom and equality she will ask for and get. Factories needed woman, and woman needed factories.

So, if you are an oil rich country and don't really need your woman to "gather" anything for you, because west will pay handsomely for your oil, than you can keep as many woman as you can afford in the house, don't allow them to simply do anything, and they will not ask for any rights or freedom in return.

But if you are not that "lucky" and need your woman to give you a shoulder, in return, she will ask for her fair share of everything; money, freedom, respect...

Rule of the nature...

IOW. Men will not do or give justice and equality unless or until forced to do so.

Do you see that as a plus for men?

Regards
DL

What do you mean by "plus"?

 

[GreatestIam]

Human kind survived and thrived over "specialization" on different tasks. And it all started by woman and man specializing on different tasks. Man hunting, woman gathering. This makes a society much more efficient.

The draw back was, the roles in work split, so did the roles in society, for almost 100.000s of thousands of years.

Of course religions see man as superior to woman and favor them, because religions are not some "fancy" god but us, and our cultures we live in are making them up, with our own rules and regulations.

No wonder why woman rights movements are aligned with the industrialization and scientific/technological advancements. The more woman can contribute, the more freedom and equality she will ask for and get. Factories needed woman, and woman needed factories.

So, if you are an oil rich country and don't really need your woman to "gather" anything for you, because west will pay handsomely for your oil, than you can keep as many woman as you can afford in the house, don't allow them to simply do anything, and they will not ask for any rights or freedom in return.

But if you are not that "lucky" and need your woman to give you a shoulder, in return, she will ask for her fair share of everything; money, freedom, respect...

Rule of the nature...

IOW. Men will not do or give justice and equality unless or until forced to do so.

Do you see that as a plus for men?

Regards
DL

What do you mean by "plus"?

Do you see that as a good moral tenet for men or an immoral one?

Regards
DL

 

[The Irish Ram]

So if I love my wife the way Christ loved the church, she will then submit to me in all matters, just as she should according to God's Law?

And she shouldn't speak in church, including teaching, or especially teaching, unless she is prophesying because Paul is afraid women may lead the church astray? Do I have that right? Seems like men have done plenty to lead the many different sects of Christianity astray every which way.

Sounds more like a patriarchal, male-dominated, gender-inequality thing to me.

But, however you want to justify the treatment of women by the early, mid, and late, and modern Church.

Who was the first female Pope? Who is the female leader of any Christian sect?

God's Law is to love one another. When you treat someone with loving kindness, they tend to respond in kind. Makes for a loving home life.
And no, you don't have that quite right. You have picked a passage from the Bible and misunderstood it for lack of research.
In doing so you have overlooked some very important preachers:

"'I brought you up from the land of Egypt, I redeemed you from the house of bondage; and I sent before you Moses, Aaron, and Miriam'".

And don't forget > Esther, Huldah, Deborah, Mary, Mary, and Mary, Phoebe, Priscilla, Phillip's daughters, James' mother and grandmother, Junia, Tryphena and Tryphos to name a few. They did the opposite of shut up.

In the book of Proverbs, godly wisdom is portrayed as a fearless woman who stands in the middle of the city and "cries out" (Prov. 8:3). She declares: "'To you, O men, I call, and my voice is to the sons of men'"

Men think they are better than women, God does not. Man is responsible for the patriarchal, male-dominated, gender-inequality thing. To God, we look like Christ.

The passage you misinterpreted concerns women from a particular church that had been receiving prophesy from a soothsayer, and were attempting to sway the congregation away from Christ. They needed to be shut up. Were they men doing the same thing, they would have been told to shut up too. It was a false prophesy issue, not a gender issue. God is not respecter of persons.

 

[alpine]

Human kind survived and thrived over "specialization" on different tasks. And it all started by woman and man specializing on different tasks. Man hunting, woman gathering. This makes a society much more efficient.

The draw back was, the roles in work split, so did the roles in society, for almost 100.000s of thousands of years.

Of course religions see man as superior to woman and favor them, because religions are not some "fancy" god but us, and our cultures we live in are making them up, with our own rules and regulations.

No wonder why woman rights movements are aligned with the industrialization and scientific/technological advancements. The more woman can contribute, the more freedom and equality she will ask for and get. Factories needed woman, and woman needed factories.

So, if you are an oil rich country and don't really need your woman to "gather" anything for you, because west will pay handsomely for your oil, than you can keep as many woman as you can afford in the house, don't allow them to simply do anything, and they will not ask for any rights or freedom in return.

But if you are not that "lucky" and need your woman to give you a shoulder, in return, she will ask for her fair share of everything; money, freedom, respect...

Rule of the nature...

IOW. Men will not do or give justice and equality unless or until forced to do so.

Do you see that as a plus for men?

Regards
DL

What do you mean by "plus"?

Do you see that as a good moral tenet for men or an immoral one?

Regards
DL

Morality is the set of rules human beings come up with, to get their societies into the path of harmony --> peace --> progress --> prosperity.

But not every rule work under every condition, just like our genes, just like the whole universe.

I am not currently arguing the history, but today.

So, in this current condition; Even the idea of men having any say over women is immoral, and detrimental to the society it would be implemented upon.

We have plenty of examples to prove this point...

 

[GreatestIam]

Alpine

+ 1

Regards
DL

 

[Coloradomtnman]

@The Irish Ram

Here is the quote from the Bible:

"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." (Ephesians 5:22-24)

How is interpreting that quote to mean that wives should be subject to their husbands a misinterpretation of that passage? Seems pretty straight forward.

This passage doesn't seem limited to a particular time but to all women in general:

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." (I Corinthians 14:34-35)

I think you want to justify these passages from your holy book to mean something which they do not. From my point of view, taking in all of the history of the Church, Western civilization, and current gender roles in the varying Christian denominations, women to be kept in a position of less power. How many female church leaders are there compared to men? What's the percentage? 0.00005%? Who was the first female Pope?

Is God a He, a She, or something in between.

What about all of those other passages from the Bible I quoted above? Can you justify all of them?

 

[GreatestIam]

I found the end of this writers talk interesting and it speaks to your question.

[MEDIA=youtube]WjdD5-GGSEc[/MEDIA]

Regards
DL

 

[The Irish Ram]

Mt.man, again a specific concern for specific church:
Since the sixth-century BC, Corinth was very well-known for the oracle at Delphi. In the Temple of Apollos at Delphi, a woman prophet called the Pythia would respond to questions asked from inquirers. In ancient times, people traveled great distances to visit Corinth and ask the Pythia questions.

Chloe, female leader from church of Corinth, sent a delegation to Paul concerning the problem of bringing pagan worship practices into the Christian church, in CORINTH.
The practice of asking questions and getting prophesy, caused the women to disrupt God breathed prophesy by asking questions. Paul told them to ask their questions at home.
To the contrary, Paul never told Phoebe< well versed in Christianity to shut up or go home. If you interpreted correctly, Paul would have told Phoebe the same thing He told the distracting women in the church at Corinth.
No where in the Old Testament are women told to shut up. To the contrary, women and wisdom go hand in hand:

Proverbs 3:18 She is a tree of life to those who take hold of ...

Wisdom is a tree of life to those who embrace her; happy are those who hold ... of life to those who lay hold of her; those who hold her fast are called blessed.

If you'd let us we are a blessing to men.