If men got the Titus 2 Treatment…

[secularhermit]

@Angela

"Jesus came to set us free from the law of sin and death and that includes the male hierarchy, and male dominance."

As far as I know I AM, I tend to put the one I love first. I don't see love as a male or FEMALE hierarchy (in fact, I dislike any hierarchical system).

I believe Adam so much loved EVE that he put 1st his connection with her than his relationship to GOD (The same is being done today: We have put 1st human's likes rather than God's bondage).

I don't know if GOD still enforced the punishment HE set to "Eve"... but I do believe HE is still enforcing the punishment HE gave to Adam (all men). That punishment is that toil all humans know to make their living and homie provision.

Of course, anyone may see the grass is greener next door... According to OUR gender (or bias), we think the other's toil is easier... I have done the job of a "mother" and te job of a "father", so I know very well why I need the opposite role, at home (just without using feminism or machism).

Praus, somewhere, used a picture. There was a woman thinking: I want equality!... But I also want special treatment. (an unfair thing).

What if that picture were a man? I would acknowledge it is machism and, as you've rightly said, Angela, Jesus set us free from that.

How free really I am?

The more I love a person, the less I push her to do the things I do. I know love always would give (it seldom takes) and I know "unbelievers" often give more than I do.

 

[Praus]

Do you really believe your hatred toward women preachers and teachers is Biblical?

I wonder who you're talking to here....

 

[secularhermit]

@ MystyDANCER.

"Women are not second class citizens, they are not property,"

I agree with that.

Adam was 1st, but GOD IS FIRST AND ABOVE.

As property: WE BELONG TO ONE ANOTHER.

 

[Praus]

Women are not second class citizens, they are not property, and it would be great if professing Christian men would stop treating God's women so shamefully and callously.

But, we can laugh about how women are full of "whoremoans"... that's respectful, right?

Hee hee...whoremoans...lol...sigh. Normally, this wouldn't be something I'd do, but the 'whoremoans' thing got to me. I think you meant hormones. Man, I just keep looking at it. I can't turn away. Okay, putting my grammar police badge away. Carry on. Hee hee hee.

 

[mystdancer50]

But, we can laugh about how women are full of "whoremoans"... that's respectful, right?

When someone is purposefully disrespectful, as the post with 'whoremoans' was, then yes, I think I am allowed to laugh at what was written and no, it wasn't disrespectful, and, as is commonplace on this site, thank you for pulling one thing out of context to make another person look bad.

The abuse on this site gets worse and worse with every passing day. I think I may take a break from here for awhile. There's enough mockery and abuse and bullying in my daily life without me purposefully coming on here and getting it.

 

[Praus]

When someone is purposefully disrespectful, as the post with 'whoremoans' was, then yes, I think I am allowed to laugh at what was written and no, it wasn't disrespectful, and, as is commonplace on this site, thank you for pulling one thing out of context to make another person look bad.

The abuse on this site gets worse and worse with every passing day. I think I may take a break from here for awhile. There's enough mockery and abuse and bullying in my daily life without me purposefully coming on here and getting it.

This is out of context too, but it's still true...

I think a woman named sister Mystdancer is really good Bible teacher.

 

[secularhermit]

Somewhere, I also said, women have beem my teachers (not PRIMARILY at the church, but just in life: Home, school, marriage... and in celibacy).

 

[Jhana]

What does hte LAW say as Angela says the LAW does not say women are not equal to men? Well as Paul (a Apostle appointed by God) said ... If one is ignorant let them be ignorant... Angela I will let you be ignorant...
Read this and the ones that are SPIRITUAl... SET FREE... they will know this is COMMANDS FROM GOD AS THE LAW ALSO SAY...

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.
1Co 14:35 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.
1Co 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
1Co 14:37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
1Co 14:38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.

It says if any MAN be ignorant... What about the ignorant woman, like Angela that wants to disprove this with her GREEK... Shame it is a SHAME for her to even speak in church... STILL APPLICABLE TODAY.... Oh SATAN loves women preachers he uses them all the time....

On bible forgeries -

1 Corinthians 14:34-35: This is a curious passage. It appears to prohibit all talking by women during services. But it contradicts verse 11:5, in which St. Paul states that women can actively pray and prophesy during services. It is obvious to some theologians that verses 14:33b to 36are a later addition, added by an unknown counterfeiter with little talent at forgery. Bible scholar, Hans Conzelmann, comments on these three and a half verses: "Moreover, there are peculiarities of linguistic usage, and of thought. [within them]." 2 If they are removed, then Verse 33a merges well with Verse 37 in a seamless transition. Since they were a later forgery, they do not fulfill the basic requirement to be considered inerrant: they were not in the original manuscript written by Paul. This is a very important passage, because much many denominations stand against female ordination is based on these verses.

Straatman, Fitzer, Barrett, Ruef, Fee, and Payne all also argue that these verses should be excised from the bible, and in fact, there are whole books of which entire chapters are disputed.

These particular verses in Corinthians present a problem. Some manuscripts put them at the end of the book, some at the end of the chapter, and others where you have quoted them. This means that these verses are an addition of some kind, since manuscript writers were unsure where to put them.

They also contradict a fair amount of other passages on female participation in the church. And you also have to remember that corinthians was one letter, to one church. There were letters to many more than one church and they didn't have this command. So, even if the verses aren't forgeries, which I strongly suspect that they are, they only apply to the church in Corinth, and not the others. Therefore, they are relevant to the time and the place, since they are actual instructions given TOWARDS that one church. They aren't blank statements or revelations, prophecies or spiritual explanations, they are a specific instruction to one church.

 

[mystdancer50]

This is out of context too, but it's still true...

I'm having a hard time on here this week. I seem to keep running into Christian men that remind me of the abuse I endured as a child. To see this still played out today, here, on a Christian site, well, my old nature rises up. I am stronger for the abuse I was dealt at the hands of my stepfather, but I am also a touch more passionate and sensitive when I see it happening here.

 

[Misty77]

When someone is purposefully disrespectful, as the post with 'whoremoans' was, then yes, I think I am allowed to laugh at what was written and no, it wasn't disrespectful, and, as is commonplace on this site, thank you for pulling one thing out of context to make another person look bad.

The abuse on this site gets worse and worse with every passing day. I think I may take a break from here for awhile. There's enough mockery and abuse and bullying in my daily life without me purposefully coming on here and getting it.

It's okay to take a break: I've done that many times, too. I know that I can't change the minds that are stubbornly clinging to ignorance and arrogance, but maybe hearing the truth can take some of the momentum out of their rampage. Maybe we can influence some of the readers to re-think their preconceived ideas on gender. Maybe we can see believers of both genders come to respect and support each other without condemnation.

I have always that that the Lord brings certain issues to your attention because He wants YOU to do something about it. Blessings, precious daughter of God!

 

[Misty77]

On bible forgeries -

1 Corinthians 14:34-35: This is a curious passage. It appears to prohibit all talking by women during services. But it contradicts verse 11:5, in which St. Paul states that women can actively pray and prophesy during services. It is obvious to some theologians that verses 14:33b to 36are a later addition, added by an unknown counterfeiter with little talent at forgery. Bible scholar, Hans Conzelmann, comments on these three and a half verses: "Moreover, there are peculiarities of linguistic usage, and of thought. [within them]." 2 If they are removed, then Verse 33a merges well with Verse 37 in a seamless transition. Since they were a later forgery, they do not fulfill the basic requirement to be considered inerrant: they were not in the original manuscript written by Paul. This is a very important passage, because much many denominations stand against female ordination is based on these verses.

Straatman, Fitzer, Barrett, Ruef, Fee, and Payne all also argue that these verses should be excised from the bible, and in fact, there are whole books of which entire chapters are disputed.

These particular verses in Corinthians present a problem. Some manuscripts put them at the end of the book, some at the end of the chapter, and others where you have quoted them. This means that these verses are an addition of some kind, since manuscript writers were unsure where to put them.

They also contradict a fair amount of other passages on female participation in the church. And you also have to remember that corinthians was one letter, to one church. There were letters to many more than one church and they didn't have this command. So, even if the verses aren't forgeries, which I strongly suspect that they are, they only apply to the church in Corinth, and not the others. Therefore, they are relevant to the time and the place, since they are actual instructions given TOWARDS that one church. They aren't blank statements or revelations, prophecies or spiritual explanations, they are a specific instruction to one church.

Thank you for speaking truth and using the Lord's gift of reason to combat misuse of His word. Blessings to you, too, mighty man of God!

 

[Jhana]

I'm having a hard time on here this week. I seem to keep running into Christian men that remind me of the abuse I endured as a child. To see this still played out today, here, on a Christian site, well, my old nature rises up. I am stronger for the abuse I was dealt at the hands of my stepfather, but I am also a touch more passionate and sensitive when I see it happening here.

Some men like to abuse the fact that their position, physically and socially, is a more dominant one than women.

Forgive me, because I can't find a better way to put it; but to abuse something that is inherently 'weaker' or more gentle than I am would be to misunderstand my place in the world - to value, respect, cherish and protect those less 'dominant' than I am.

 

[jennymae]

But, we can laugh about how women are full of "whoremoans"... that's respectful, right?

Dearest Sir, I may have misunderstood Your point here, maybe theres something I did not get or maybe Im just plain stupid, but reading this made me sad. I wasnt expecting to read such a word in here.

 

[Jhana]

@ MystyDANCER.

"Women are not second class citizens, they are not property,"

I agree with that.

Adam was 1st, but GOD IS FIRST AND ABOVE.

As property: WE BELONG TO ONE ANOTHER.

The word 'belong' always gets me. There are actually two meanings to this word in English. And I think that many years ago, the second would have been what was meant.

I can say to someone 'that iPhone belongs to me', and that means 'I own it'. But as for humans, nobody on this earth 'owns' a human as though they are a possession. Or at least, nobody should.

The other meaning of ''belonging' is actually to do with having a place in the world, or 'befitting' a certain thing.

For instance, 'you and I belong with each other'. It means that we are placed together and we literally 'fit in', or that our 'place' is with each other. We befit one another.

It doesn't imply ownership, in this sense.

At least that's how I think male and female relationships should be. Not a matter of ownership, rather a matter of befitting one another, fitting together perfectly. And that has to be worked on, that has to be a mutual aspiration, and it has to be founded on compassion.

The first only needs to be founded on lawful 'ownership', the second requires things that create a true 'belonging'.

 

[Misty77]

Dearest Sir, I may have misunderstood Your point here, maybe theres something I did not get or maybe Im just plain stupid, but reading this made me sad. I wasnt expecting to read such a word in here.

Your intelligence is not in question here. There is a handy-dandy ignore button for such occurrences.

 

[secularhermit]

Some men like to abuse the fact that their position, physically and socially, is a more dominant one than women. Forgive me, because I can't find a better way to put it; but to abuse something that is inherently 'weaker' or more gentle than I am would be to misunderstand my place in the world - to value, respect, cherish and protect those less 'dominant' than I am.

I can make public the "ROLE" abuse I have seen has more than one sexual gender. Each, men or woMEN, have missused their role and position, phycally, socially and, here, WE COULD HAVE ATTESTED the emotionally we sensed, somehow. Misty77! May you be my Valentine for 5 minutes? (just for today) No pictures on demand, by the way. No more fight requiered. Will you? NOT FOR TWO DAYS... Muack!

 

[Praus]

.... stubbornly clinging to ignorance and arrogance, ...

Perhaps it's the way that you mock swarthy peoples' traditional Christian practices?

I'm wondering how old your church is compared to, say, the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church? They practice the holy kiss you can see from the video in post #5 and it's not "satire".

Yet despite the fact that this is one of the most repeated directives of Scripture, one is hard-pressed to find men kissing one another on the cheeck in churches today. This is because those who do not take the Bible seriously claim these clear teachings of Scripture have a “cultural” component.

[video=youtube;GV6gPW9uTmg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GV6gPW9uTmg[/video]

 

[secularhermit]

@Misty77! Look at this, a pastor anD friend texted to me: Si este 14 de febrero NO tienes tu media naranja... ¡NO IMPORTA! Te pones UNA MEDIA de cualquier otro color. Total! La gente no te revisa al salir a la calle. Ja! Ja!

 

[Praus]

Dearest Sir, I may have misunderstood Your point here, maybe theres something I did not get or maybe Im just plain stupid, but reading this made me sad. I wasnt expecting to read such a word in here.

I was quoting someone to demonstrate the hypocrisy going on here, note that I used the word in quotes--I apologize for any confusion.

 

[Misty77]

@Misty77! Look at this, a pastor anD friend texted to me: Si este 14 de febrero NO tienes tu media naranja... ¡NO IMPORTA! Te pones UNA MEDIA de cualquier otro color. Total! La gente no te revisa al salir a la calle. Ja! Ja!

Very cool, but I'm not sure that some ideas translate easily into English. =)

To make sure I understood correctly, I ran it through google translate. (I know, not the most accurate, either.) This is what it said:

If this February 14th NO's your better half [you don't have your medium orange] ...NO MATTER! You put AN AVERAGE any other color. Total! People do not check to go outside. Ha! Ha!