The Bible vs Progressive Women

[Webers.Home]

.
Misogyny was given quite a bit of negative press during former US President
Donald Trump's administration; while misandry was condoned as if it were
acceptable. But malice is unacceptable with God on any level; and I think we
have to agree to the possibility that there are just as many, if not more,
man haters in Hell as there are woman haters because women are not a
protected species with God; nor is their gender a mitigating factor. They will
be judged solely on the basis of their lives the same as men.

● Rom 2:9-11. .There will be trouble and distress for every human being
who does evil: For God does not show favoritism.

* The disturbing scene depicted at Rev 20:11-15 will be presided over by
none other than the sweet little babe away in a manger.

● John 5:21-23 . . Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all
judgment to the Son

● Acts 17:31 . . He has set a day when He will judge the world with justice
by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by
raising him from the dead.

I would very much dislike to be a woman infected with misandry because in
the end, it will be a "toxic male" that dooms man-hating women and thus
permanently ruin any chances they might have had for happiness in the
future. For all eternity, those hostile females will grind their teeth with hot
tears and clenched-fist fury that they ultimately lost out on everything
because of one lone man's obsessive control over their lives. Hell is bad
enough as it is, but I would imagine that existing there seething with rage
makes one's circumstances a hell within Hell.
_

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

.
Misogyny was given quite a bit of negative press during former US President
Donald Trump's administration; while misandry was condoned as if it were
acceptable. But malice is unacceptable with God on any level; and I think we
have to agree to the possibility that there are just as many, if not more,
man haters in Hell as there are woman haters because women are not a
protected species with God; nor is their gender a mitigating factor. They will
be judged solely on the basis of their lives the same as men.

● Rom 2:9-11. .There will be trouble and distress for every human being
who does evil: For God does not show favoritism.

* The disturbing scene depicted at Rev 20:11-15 will be presided over by
none other than the sweet little babe away in a manger.

● John 5:21-23 . . Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all
judgment to the Son

● Acts 17:31 . . He has set a day when He will judge the world with justice
by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by
raising him from the dead.

I would very much dislike to be a woman infected with misandry because in
the end, it will be a "toxic male" that dooms man-hating women and thus
permanently ruin any chances they might have had for happiness in the
future. For all eternity, those hostile females will grind their teeth with hot
tears and clenched-fist fury that they ultimately lost out on everything
because of one lone man's obsessive control over their lives. Hell is bad
enough as it is, but I would imagine that existing there seething with rage
makes one's circumstances a hell within Hell.
_

Yeah, I agree. But what caused you to post this? Just wondering!


🍰

 

[Magenta]

* The disturbing scene depicted at Rev 20:11-15 will be presided
over by none other than the sweet little babe away in a manger.

● John 5:21-23 . . Moreover, the Father judges no one, but has entrusted all judgment to the Son

Acts 17:31 . . He has set a day when He will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed.

Yeah, a babe is not a man...

I would very much dislike to be a woman infected with misandry because in
the end, it will be a "toxic male" that dooms man-hating women

Calling Jesus a toxic male? Yikes. Your love of hearing yourself speak gets away with you.

 

[daisyseesthesun]

Yeah, a babe is not a man...

Calling Jesus a toxic male? Yikes. Your love of hearing yourself speak gets away with you.

the bible talks about how the devil would make war on women in the end days. All I see is hate toward us women and now we are to be blamed once more?

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Eph 5:22 . .Wives, submit to your husbands as to The Lord.

It's not the husband himself who merits his wife's best behavior, rather,
it's his position in the home. For example:

"To the woman he said: Your husband . . he will rule over you." (Gen 3:16)

Adam is ranked superior to Eve not because of his gender, rather, because
he's the senior of the two, i.e. Adam was created first, and afterwards the
woman was constructed with material taken from his body; thus all men,
including Christ, are entitled to seniority relative to women simply by virtue
of the fact that Adam is the paterfamilias of all women, beginning with Eve,
regardless of age race, color, culture, and/or religious preference.

So then:

"Demonstrate your fear of God by standing up in the presence of elderly
people and showing respect for the aged. I am The Lord." (Lev 19:32)

Rising to one's feet for the elders among us carries over to revering God
because He too is an elder among us. God likely doesn't look His age--
except maybe in a figure of speech, e.g. Dan 7:9 --but we really should keep
in mind that He's among us as not only a better, but also a senior. So we
would do well to step aside for God, carry His bags, and/or hold a door open
for Him not only because he's a deity and a monarch, but mainly because
He's older.

The Greek word for "submit" is the very same for submit in Eph 5:21 which
shouldn't be taken to mean wives are supposed to take orders from their
husbands as if marriage were an arrangement similar to a monarch and a
commoner. What we're talking about here is deference rather than
obedience.

Deference is agreeable, approachable, tactful, and diplomatic. Deference
isn't confrontational, demanding, assertive, militant, dominating, nor always
clamoring: I am woman! Hear me roar!

In a nutshell: deference is just the opposite of defiance. Christian wives
striving for equality with their men have not yet learned what it means to
associate with a husband as they would The Lord.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Col 1:15 . . He is the firstborn over all creation.

The position of the firstborn is very notable throughout the Bible, beginning
with Adam and finding its ultimate supremacy with Christ.

FAQ: How is Christ in the position of the supreme firstborn when so many of
his ancestors came before him? Shouldn't he be the junior and they the
senior?

REPLY: Jesus would normally be pretty low on the primogeniture totem pole
were it not that the position of the firstborn among men isn't set in concrete,
rather, it's possible to circumvent an elder and give his seniority to a
junior, for example:

Ishmael to Isaac (Gen 20:11-12) Esau to Jacob (Gen 25:23) Reuben to
Joseph (Gen 49:3-4, 1Chr 5:1) Manasseh to Ephraim (Gen 48:13-14) Adam
to David (Ps 89:20-27) and David to Jesus. (Ps 110:1, Matt 22:42-45)
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● 1Cor 11:3 . . 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.

It never seems to fail that somebody will actually attempt to refute Paul's
instructions by quoting another of Paul's instructions. To wit:

"You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were
baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew
nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ
Jesus." (Gal 3:26-28)

(chuckle) Paul pitted against Paul; the clash of the titans, only in this event,
both titans are one and the same titan. Yes, both genders are one in Christ;
but then Jesus and God are one also, yet there is a hierarchy in the Divinity
because "the head of Christ is God"

NOTE: Beware becoming militant about this because it's neither a gender
issue, an intelligence issue, a competency issue, a strength issue, or a
maturity issue. This particular arrangement is based solely upon seniority.
(Gen 2:21-22, Gen 3:16, & 1Tim 2:13)
_

 

[Cameron143]

How dare you second class people question anything on this thread?

 

[Dino246]

.
● Eph 5:22 . .Wives, submit to your husbands as to The Lord.

It's not the husband himself who merits his wife's best behavior, rather,
it's his position in the home. For example:

"To the woman he said: Your husband . . he will rule over you." (Gen 3:16)

Adam is ranked superior to Eve not because of his gender, rather, because
he's the senior of the two, i.e. Adam was created first, and afterwards the
woman was constructed with material taken from his body; thus all men,
including Christ, are entitled to seniority relative to women simply by virtue
of the fact that Adam is the paterfamilias of all women, beginning with Eve,
regardless of age race, color, culture, and/or religious preference.

Hogwash and codswollop!

There is NOTHING WHATSOEVER indicating that the man's prior creation affords him any "superiority". By that "logic", man should "defer" to animals, and animals should "defer" to plants. Ridiculous!

God pronounced terrible consequences for sin on the serpent, the woman, and the man, part of which is "but he will rule over you". There is no command given there. He isn't saying what "should" happen, but what will happen.

Ephesians 5:22 follows Ephesians 5:21, which says, "Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ."

In short, Adam is not "ranked superior" to Eve at all. By God's design, marriage is to be a mutually-supportive cooperation between two powerful partners whose strengths complement each other's.

 

[Webers.Home]

.

By that "logic", man should "defer" to animals, and animals should "defer" to plants.

Aside from the fact that neither animal life nor plant life was created in the
image and likeness of God (which eo ipso makes a man superior to all other
forms of life on Earth) it's possible to circumvent a senior and transfer his
preeminence to a junior; for example:

"God blessed them and said to them: Fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over
the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that
moves on the ground. I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the
whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours
for food." (Gen 1:28-29)

More examples the kind of circumvention I'm talking about are:

Ishmael to Isaac (Gen 20:11-12) Esau to Jacob (Gen 25:23) Reuben to
Joseph (Gen 49:3-4, 1Chr 5:1) Manasseh to Ephraim (Gen 48:13-14) Adam
to David (Ps 89:20-27) and David to Jesus. (Ps 110:1, Matt 22:42-45)
_

 

[Mem]

Yes. Seems a hell lot of people make God in the image of themselves.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● 1Cor 11:4-5a . . Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered
disrespects his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her
head uncovered disrespects her head.

The man's head is Christ (1Cor 11:13a) and the woman's head is Adam
(1Cor 11:13b)

Christian women aren't required to cover their hair all the time; only during
prayer and/or prophesy; especially in the presence of men. The idea here is
for the woman to avoid drawing attention to herself and thus diminish the
man's glory which, in effect, diminishes God's glory. (1Cor 11:7)

NOTE: Women's head coverings aren't merely a token of submission to a
higher power. Coverings-- e.g. scarves and hijabs --serve the purpose of
dimming women's glamour just a bit. I mean; dolled-up women easily outshine
men, and that's permitted in secular situations, but in liturgical situations it's
important for Christian women to acknowledge she was intended for a
supporting role in the divine scheme of things rather than a co-star's role.
(Gen 2:18)

* To progressive women; Christianity is arguably a subjugation of women,
whereas to Christian women; the matter is settled in Heaven, viz: it is what
it is.
_

 

[Dino246]

.
● 1Cor 11:4-5a . . Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered
disrespects his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her
head uncovered disrespects her head.

The man's head is Christ (1Cor 11:13a) and the woman's head is Adam
(1Cor 11:13b)

Christian women aren't required to cover their hair all the time; only during
prayer and/or prophesy; especially in the presence of men. The idea here is
for the woman to avoid drawing attention to herself and thus diminish the
man's glory which, in effect, diminishes God's glory. (1Cor 11:7)

NOTE: Women's head coverings aren't merely a token of submission to a
higher power. Coverings-- e.g. scarves and hijabs --serve the purpose of
dimming women's glamour just a bit. I mean; dolled-up women easily outshine
men, and that's permitted in secular situations, but in liturgical situations it's
important for Christian women to acknowledge she was intended for a
supporting role in the divine scheme of things rather than a co-star's role.
(Gen 2:18)

I encourage you to check the Hebrew in Genesis 2:18, and to look up the other places where the phrase ezer kenegdo is used. "Supporting role" is not supported by the evidence.

 

[Magenta]

I encourage you to check the Hebrew in Genesis 2:18, and to look up the other places where
the phrase ezer kenegdo is used. "Supporting role" is not supported by the evidence.

Thank you, Dino .. This might also help:

When Eve was made for Adam, the term used to describe her role was ezer kenegdo.

In Genesis 2:18, the word "helpmeet" does not occur. The Hebrew expression ezer kenegdo appears,
meaning "one who is the same as the other and who surrounds, protects, aids, helps, supports." The
combination of these two Hebrew words has two roots: `-z-r, meaning "to rescue, to save," and g-z-r,
meaning "to be strong." There is no indication of inferiority or of a secondary position in an hierarchical
separation of the male and female "spheres" of responsibility, authority, or social position.

Biblical use of the word ezer often refers to either God or military allies. In all other cases the one
giving the help is superior to the one receiving the help. Adding kenegdo (meet) modifies the meaning
to that of equal rather than superior status. Scripture is so awesome. God says just what He means.

The word ezer is used twice in the Old Testament to refer to the female and 14 times to refer to
God. For example, in the Psalms when David says, "The Lord is my Helper," he uses the word ezer.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
Sometimes there's times when it's time for something silly; so:


A spinster lady was asked why she never married. Well; she said: I've got a
hound that lays around the house all day, a stove that smokes, and a bird
that cusses. What do I need a man for?

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ol' Dan Tucker was a fine old man,
He washed his face in a frying pan.
He combed his hair with a wagon wheel,
And died of a toothache in his heel.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Here come old flat top,
He roller coaster,
He got early warning,
He got muddy water,
He one Mojo filter,
He say one and one and one is three,
Got to be good looking,
'Cause he's so hard to see.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Q:Why do aliens tend to spill their tea?
A: .ylf srecuas rieht resuaceB

Q:Why did the apple pie go to the dentist?
A: .gnillif a dedeen ti esuaceB

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Here's a brain teaser:

DATA: Airplane #1 leaves LAX at 250mph. Airplane #2 leaves LAX twenty
minutes later at 400mph.

PROBLEM: How long will it take plane #2 to catch up to plane #1, and how
far from the airport will the intercept occur.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● 1Cor 11:6a . . If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her
hair cut off;

It's tempting to construe these rules as demeaning to women; but we're
getting at something fundamental here that goes all the way back to the first
few chapters of Genesis.

Women, by nature, are far more alluring than men. And that's okay @ home
and/or out in the world where they're allowed to pour on the glam and look
amazing. But in church, they ought to dull their shine a bit due to Adam's
seniority and the rule of God in the grand scheme of things.

● 1Cor 11:6b . . If it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or
shaved off, she should cover her head.

If Christian women would be somewhat embarrassed to show up in church
with a man's hair, then they have only one other option; and that's to show
up in church with a women's. But in order to retain their beauty in the
presence of God; they are simply going to have to tone it down a bit by
obscuring their hair with something or Heaven will have no choice but to
assume the worst about them.

According to Gen 2:18, women were intended to function in a supporting
role rather than a co-starring role. Inequality of any kind is no doubt
unacceptable to progressive women, but if we attempt to appease their
discontent we'll only end up disappointing our superior in Heaven.
_

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

Here's a brain teaser:

DATA: Airplane #1 leaves LAX at 250mph. Airplane #2 leaves LAX twenty
minutes later at 400mph.

PROBLEM: How long will it take plane #2 to catch up to plane #1, and how
far from the airport will the intercept occur.

Are they traveling in the same direction?


🐹

 

[daisyseesthesun]

.
● 1Cor 11:4-5a . . Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered
disrespects his head. And every woman who prays or prophesies with her
head uncovered disrespects her head.

The man's head is Christ (1Cor 11:13a) and the woman's head is Adam
(1Cor 11:13b)

Christian women aren't required to cover their hair all the time; only during
prayer and/or prophesy; especially in the presence of men. The idea here is
for the woman to avoid drawing attention to herself and thus diminish the
man's glory which, in effect, diminishes God's glory. (1Cor 11:7)

NOTE: Women's head coverings aren't merely a token of submission to a
higher power. Coverings-- e.g. scarves and hijabs --serve the purpose of
dimming women's glamour just a bit. I mean; dolled-up women easily outshine
men, and that's permitted in secular situations, but in liturgical situations it's
important for Christian women to acknowledge she was intended for a
supporting role in the divine scheme of things rather than a co-star's role.
(Gen 2:18)

* To progressive women; Christianity is arguably a subjugation of women,
whereas to Christian women; the matter is settled in Heaven, viz: it is what
it is.
_

what about Billy Graham's wife Ruth then? She felt God had called her to the mission field in China but chose to marry Billy instead. she clearly outshined him at dinner gatherings with celebrities and he delighted in her involvement. That is a real man for you.

 

[SaysWhat]

.
● 1Cor 11:6a . . If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her
hair cut off;

It's tempting to construe these rules as demeaning to women; but we're
getting at something fundamental here that goes all the way back to the first
few chapters of Genesis.

Women, by nature, are far more alluring than men. And that's okay @ home
and/or out in the world where they're allowed to pour on the glam and look
amazing. But in church, they ought to dull their shine a bit due to Adam's
seniority and the rule of God in the grand scheme of things.

● 1Cor 11:6b . . If it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or
shaved off, she should cover her head.

If Christian women would be somewhat embarrassed to show up in church
with a man's hair, then they have only one other option; and that's to show
up in church with a women's. But in order to retain their beauty in the
presence of God; they are simply going to have to tone it down a bit by
obscuring their hair with something or Heaven will have no choice but to
assume the worst about them.

According to Gen 2:18, women were intended to function in a supporting
role rather than a co-starring role. Inequality of any kind is no doubt
unacceptable to progressive women, but if we attempt to appease their
discontent we'll only end up disappointing our superior in Heaven.
_

Are you saying those verses just apply in church?

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● 1Cor 11:7-10 . . For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch
as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
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. For this cause
ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

Now we're getting into the sphere of self control. In other words; it's natural
for women to want to look their best, but in liturgical situations they need to
suppress their vanity and make an effort to look a bit frumpy.

According to Ps 8:1-5 and Heb 2:6-7, the angels are a step above human life
so for sure women rank below celestial beings just as they rank below the
image and glory of God.

Well anyway; whoever these angels are, or whatever they are, they're
apparently outraged and indignant when they see women in church acting
as though they're equals with men in the presence of God.

* Christians have simply got to come to grips with the reality that women
are not equal to men in the divine order of things. No, they will always be
daddy's little girl. Ergo: women aren't from Venus after all; no, they're
actually the daughters of Mars (so to speak).

FAQ: Didn't Paul make that hair coverings optional when he said: "But if any
man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches
of God" (1Cor 11:16)

REPLY: Apparently the Jews' synagogues, and all the rest of the Christian
churches in the Roman world, required their women to attend worship
services with something over their hair. Were the Christian women at
Corinth allowed an exemption, they would stand out as heretics.

"Judge in yourselves: is it proper that a woman pray unto God uncovered?"
(1Cor 11:13)

The answer of course is NO; it isn't proper-- it's insolent, inappropriate,
irreverent and it's offensive to the angels; plus it's conduct unbecoming for
women professing Christ's divine prerogative to tell his own followers how
to be a Christian.
_