First of all, I apologize for calling that a tactic. I have seen people go to that sort of approach to this discussion. A poster mentions wives submitting to husbands, and then someone shows pictures of abused women, as if those who believe in submission in marriage think violence against women is acceptable. There is a whole youtube video that argues against a conservative, historical approach to the issue against a backdrop of pictures of abused women. It probably wasn't a 'tactic' on your part, but just where your mind went.
Good. Apology accepted.
Maybe it's a 'been there done that' thing for you. However, my views are only expressed in honesty and sincerity. Of course the images of abused women first come into play, because even if we don't like it -That's the reality.
Here are some statistics
- Every 2 minutes, according to RAINN, someone in the United States is sexually assaulted.
- 44 percent of victims are under the age of 18 in sexual assaults; 80 percent are under the age of 30.
- 1 in 4 women has experienced domestic violence.
- Women account for 85% of the victims of intimate partner violence, men for approximately 15%.
- Low-income individuals are at a higher risk for domestic violence.
- Approximately 2 million people call crisis hotlines annually regarding violence.
- Everyday, approximately 3 women and 1 man are murdered by romantic partners in the United States.
- Approximately 50 percent of men who assault their partners also assault their children.
- As many as 10 million children witness domestic violence annually.
- Men and women engage in comparable levels of abuse and control, though women are more likely to use emotional manipulation whereas men use sexual coercion and physical dominance.
And this is in the United States alone. A developed country.
If a person was really Christian, and following Jesus, they wouldn't be hurting women or other men. I agree.
Also most victims of abuse remain silent about it for years altogether. The feminism movement highlights this aspect and brings attention to situations like this.
Isn't that a good thing?
And apparently you've had this discussion so many times before, that you can tell where people's minds go.
I wonder why you're posting and continuing in this cyclic fashion.
Your apparent problem with feminism, is that Pastors and sermons tend to
gloss over verses of submission and women are not told enough that they should submit.
Btw, how does feminism teach people to throw acid on people? You think acid attacks are very common? Worldwide? I'm sure it's all to common. Once is more than enough. Is this an Afghanistan thing? I'd venture to guess even most Muslims would oppose such a practice. I think the one's I've met would. I wouldn't be surprised if your average Afghani male though it was brutal.
Of course it happens quite often in the Indian subcontinent.
Once is definitely more than enough, and it happens in countries like Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Hong Kong, China, United Kingdom, Kenya, South Africa, Uganda, Ethiopia.
Maybe you'd like to generalize this as a cultural thing but I will remind you that I am Indian and not American.
This is why I reacted the way I did. I'd posted about the Biblical teaching of wives submitting to husbands in the OP. This seems to dismiss the importance of submission, somehow associating it with horrific acts of violence. The case you mentioned was about a fiance, not a husband. But in regard to marriage, I don't know of anyone who professes to be a Christian who would say it was justified for a man to do an act of violence like that toward his wife if she did not submit to him. I took your post as a kind of commentary on the issue. It is the Bible that tells wives to submit to their husbands. We don't think Peter or Paul would have endorsed torturing and deforming women's bodies like this if they do not submit. That just didn't seem to fit well as a response to the Biblical issue.
You were talking about dangers of feminism. I brought out some of the things that feminist movements are against.
That verse is not meant to be a stick to be used to beat women with. It is the conduct between a husband and a wife.
So what does this have to do with the dangers of feminism? Does feminism have to be the 'voice' to speak out against the atrocities? My point is that feminist philosophy diverges from what scripture teaches, and leads many people to oppose it, in certain areas. Does one have to be a feminist to be opposed to violence and atrocities?
I don't believe in labels.
I wish Christians were more active on this forefront, than unbelieving feminists.
What a shame.
Lots of stream-of-conscious type writing here. But this doesn't really address or attack anything I've written. I'm not saying we shouldn't strip people of humans and not treat them with respect. I just don't see how showing a victim of acid throwing and saying she didn't submit is a suitable response to a discussion of the Bible teaching of wives submitting to husbands. I'm against the acid throwing, of course. But it seems like you were being dismissive of a teaching for wives in scripture.
My writing was probably full of emotion, because the cause of women and their rights, is close to the heart.
I will not apologize for that.
What does equality for women and respect for them, have to do with wives and husbands?
Is it because if women are told they are equal, and they deserve respect it is going to hamper a relationship between a husband and wife?
Why would it hamper such a relationship?
I was not being dismissive of this teaching. If you want to solely talk about this verse, then you should have made a thread. Wives submit to your husbands.
Not dangers of feminism.
The pictures just show why we need to address the issue of respect for women.
Christ died to set us free from sin. Many saints in history have been slaves in the natural sense. Others have lived in difficult, even oppressive situations. That doesn't mean that they were unholy, unrighteous, or that Christ death had not accomplished its purpose in their lives. Christianity isn't all about getting people a specific set of political rights written out by John Locke and later political thinkers.
This is also doesn't mean that while we can provide justice, we dismiss it as not important.
As Christians, we cannot stay silent when we see injustice, suffering and denial of political rights. Aren't we the light of this world?
Shouldn't we be giving hope?
Shouldn't we be showing our faith through our actions?
For some reason, I'm thinking of the pilot episode of the old Star Trek series, where the aliens give Captain Pike all kinds of hallucinations to make him fall in love with a human they rescued from the wreckage in hopes they would produce offspring who could serve the aliens. The aliens had big brains, but had lost the ability to do manual labor. Pike would rather die than be a slave to the aliens. The aliens decided that a race that would rather die than be slaves was of no use to them.
But humans would not rather die than be slaves. Not most humans. That's a learned value, a cultural value. Certainly one you might find among modern Americans, but not something that's hard-wired. History shows that to be the case. If some of the restrictions and obligations that the US government puts on it's citizens were put on the first generation of American citizens, they likely would have revolted. The frog doesn't realize the water is heating up if the water is heated slowly.
Equality is a western obsession. Other cultures may have shared it throughout time, but it's not a cultural universal, and it doesn't show up much in scripture. The New Testament does mention equality on the issue of churches in difference cities sharing resources, though.
I am sorry. I dont' know and am not interested in understanding American nuances in terms of telivision.
But I am surprised that being an American, you talk of equality like this?
You guys adopted the Declaration of Rights of Human and Civic Rights, a document of the French Revolution
Everyone wants equality. 'Equality' is a buzz word there. But does it mean anything? That reminds me of Napoleon the pig in Animal Farm saying, "Some animals are more equal than others." The word equality has lost it's meaning in that statement. If everyone wants equality, what are they being made equal to? Who wants to be made equal, economically, to the homeless man on the street. To Bill Gates, yes. But not to the homeless man. And is the government going to make me equal in basketball playing ability to Shaq?
Equality is not equality in terms of talent or wealth. You're thinking in terms of government benefits.
Let me tell you, the homeless man on the street and Bill Gates, are both equal.
And whether or not that is granted by the government, they both should have the same rights because in front of God they have they do.
Again, the problem is in the question. Men and women are not numbers. If you are doing algebra, and 'women'=5, give me the value of 'men' and I can answer. Otherwise, you will have to tell me what you mean by less. Less in what regard? In body weight, men are probably greater on average, but not always in the individual case. In upper body strength, on average, men will win. In life expectancy? Women. In some score awarded to people for ability to give birth to healthy children, men will lose. In terms of how much God loves an individual? I do not speculate that all are loved equally, as many boldly do, but I see no reason to think God's love for an individual is related to gender. In terms of being heirs according to the promise, there is no male nor female. In terms of authority in the household, it depends. The male child must submit to his female mother. But the wife is supposed to submit to her husband.
This is not about assessing the qualities of a man and a woman, in terms of some parameters.
But since you can't seem to see beyond this, I'll make my question.
There is a man and a woman. Say A and B.
Both A and B have the same life expectancies, same age, same weight, same upper body strength, same mental abilities everything.
Except A is a man and B is a woman.
f(A, B)
What is the output.
Is A=B or A>B?
And f is the function that computes a relational operation of equality before God and government, state, legalities, offices, businesses etc.
And I gave you a quite lengthy answer, not unlike the previous paragraph.
Yep.
The Bible instructs believers to be subject to rulers. Is that endorsing favoritism? Is that making one person less than another? If you say, 'yes', you do not understand the meaning of favoritism in these scriptures. If you say the instruction to wives to submit to their husbands is respect of persons, you do not understand respect of persons.
God does not show favouritism. At all. I posted verses on that.
I suspect if slavery returned, it would come through Is|am, possibly with some of it focused on a kind of sex slavery. There is some interest in this is Is|am right now. At least one cleric has suggested it. No, I would not see this as a good thing.
But I wouldn't condemn all slave owners in times past as being unholy people. Philemon loved the brethren, and he was a slave owner. Some of the patriarchs were slave owners.
I am sorry. I don't like to make flippant remarks about the future.
And I don't like to look to the past, and continue similar mistakes.
If slavery ever returns, while I am alive, I am going to be against it. As a Christian woman.
This paragraph illustrates the problem of feminism. A righteous, godly man who accepts the teachings of the Bible and loves his wife wants his Christian wife to submit to him. Why? If he loves her and he loves God, he wants her to do what is pleasing to God. Peter was married. But he did not write to wives to submit to their husbands because he wanted to lord over his wife. He taught this because this is godly, apostolic doctrine.
Fine. Go and make your wife submit to you.
No one has a problem with that.
Just don't go around making it seem like it is because women are inferior to men. That is misogynism.
Then we will all be in peace
You also seem to equate feminism with wanting 'respect and equality.' I've pointed out one of the problems with feminism. It posits that patriarchy is evil, the source of women's woes. But there is plenty of patriarchy in the Bible. Look at the laws related to family given by the LORD in the Old Testament.
Feminism is about wanting respect and equality. If a woman works just as hard as a man and doesn't get paid the same, that's injustice and it's wrong and it has to be addressed.
There are patriarchal and matriarchal societies, in different cultures across the world.
Jesus has come for them all.
Many posters did. Did you post anything along those lines? '
Why should I?
I am an unmarried single Christian woman. I submit first to Jesus and I am under no such obligation to talk about husbands and wives.
In fact, I think the relationship between a husband and wife is between them and God. And people should stop trying to project their ideal relationships onto others.
They have the Bible and they have God and each other. It is between them.
If Christian women here, seemed to not be affected, what's your problem? You want ALL women to submit to you?
What's my problem? Hmmm. Do you have a problem? Why would you think I want all women to submit to me? What statement have I made that would give you that impression? That's not really a fair question. I could just as easily ask you if you want to throw acid on all men. That would be an unfair question as well.
It's a very fair question because it would give a fair understanding to other people where you're coming from.
I don't like to debate misogynists. They tend to hate me
You can ask me such a question about whether I want to commit violence against men. No. I don't. I love my brothers in Christ. I stay away from those who are not.
What about spreading falsehood? I haven't spread hate for women. Feminism is not the same thing as women. Some women are anti-feminist. Feminism is a certain set of philosophies. I don't agree with that philosophy. The apostles' teachings don't agree with it. That doesn't mean I hate women, or that they hated women.
Feminism talks about granting rights to women. You don't have to be a feminist.
But so far the only danger, you've brought up is the relationship between husbands and wives.
Some of the movement's beliefs and goals are spearheaded by women who are not for God and who are against God.
I think it's time Christian women stood up to this and spoke more about it, and held the mantle of Christ.
Their voice makes more of a difference
And both Christian men and women, should be hand in hand, supporting those who can't support themselves.
But if you don't want to post, be my guest.
I am taking one for the ladies.
