Are women inferior to men?

[SkyWriting]

Not really sure how long you have been reading the Bible. Don't really care. But I will point out that you are in utter error. The entire Bible agrees with Paul's words. The entire 'culture' of the Hebrews/Jews followed the same pattern.

I guess next you'll be telling us that Moses was 'making it up' as he went along as well. Blessings,MEC

I pray that your role as a modern prophet works out as God desires.

 

[SkyWriting]

So when Paul says "be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ," doesn't that mean that we listen to him?

Lets question that one as well.

 

[SkyWriting]

So you're saying that the Holy Spirit allowed error to get into, and remain in, Scripture?

Are you familiar with the number of books removed from scripture?
I am saying about 3 ideas have yet to be removed.

 

[Achilles6129]

Lets question that one as well.

Ah. So apparently you do not believe that Paul was divinely inspired and was writing the words of God. Correct me if I am wrong.

"15 and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, 16 as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." 2 Pet. 3:15-16 (NASB)

"37 If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment." 1 Cor. 14:37 (NASB)

FYI - he says this directly after he says that women shouldn't speak in church.

 

[Achilles6129]

Are you familiar with the number of books removed from scripture?

As far as I am aware there were never any books removed from Scripture. The criteria of canonicity (at least for the NT) excludes any other addition into the canon. There's simply nothing to compete with the books of the New Testament.

 

[Imagican]

The golden rule is the only method of creating order.
While other religions have a sentence or two on the
subject, Christianity refers to it as the foundation.
The rule eliminates gender discrimination in thought
and deed. http://biblehub.com/matthew/7-12.htm

Dude,

Are you serious or just trying to get attention?

These are the 'two great commandments' that have nothing to do with treating others as you would have them treat you. I have already pointed out that what you refer to as the 'Golden Rule' presupposes that one is a 'follower' of the truth:

Matthew 22:

36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

The last sentence sums up this: 'all the law ever offered by God, every prophet ever sent by God to deliver a message hang on these two: Love God, Love each other.

And there is no 'love' in doing unto others as you would have them do unto you if the 'doing' is contrary to 'love'. There is no love involved with hurting others because you want others to hurt you. Ludicrous concept.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

You may test any two groups or individuals you like.

"The president" vs "the people." Each group has volunteered to make rules for the other.
Men Vs Women - No
pastor vs congregation - yes
rich vs poor - no
black vs white - no
tall vs short - no
president vs interest group - yes
dictator vs people - no
board of directors vs company - yes
Jews vs Christian - no
Pope vs Church - yes

You may do unto others....as long as you let them do the same to you.

It becomes more and more apparent that it's not the Bible that you come up with your understanding. Nothing in the Bible speaks of 'letting people do unto you so you can do unto them the same'. Turning the other cheek isn't about 'letting someone do unto you'. It concerns forgiveness.

May I ask your age?

Blessings,

MEC

 

[SkyWriting]

It becomes more and more apparent that it's not the Bible that you come up with your understanding. Nothing in the Bible speaks of 'letting people do unto you so you can do unto them the same'. Turning the other cheek isn't about 'letting someone do unto you'. It concerns forgiveness.May I ask your age?
Blessings,MEC

You may ask my great Grand Child.
But I'm able to handle epic dance moves,
so you may get confused.

No cheek turning has been mentioned.

Stop thy coy innocence of thy scripture!
King James Bible
Therefore all things whatsoever
ye would that men should do to you,
do ye even so to them:
for this is the law and the prophets.

American Standard Version
All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Luke 6:31
And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

Galatians 5:14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

Romans 13:8-10 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loves another has fulfilled the law...

Weymouth New Testament
And behave to your fellow men just as you would have them behave to you.

Galatians 5:13,14 For, brothers, you have been called to liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another...

Lets hypothesize that you are a women reading this:

All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Now. As of this reading, all gender related discrimination of any kind is ruled out. Unless you're a woman and want to be told to shut up. Odds are slim on that. Gender based rules are history.

 

[SkyWriting]

Dude,Are you serious or just trying to get attention?
These are the 'two great commandments' that have nothing to do with treating others as you would have them treat you.
Matthew 22:36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
The last sentence sums up this: 'all the law ever offered by God, every prophet ever sent by God to deliver a message hang on these two: Love God, Love each other.And there is no 'love' in doing unto others as you would have them do unto you if the 'doing' is contrary to 'love'. There is no love involved with hurting others because you want others to hurt you. Ludicrous concept.Blessings,MEC

I can't make you read what you don't want to believe. Nearly on the same page.

Matthew 7:12 In everything, then, do to others as you would have them do to you.
For this is the essence of the Law and the prophets.

 

[SkyWriting]

As far as I am aware there were never any books removed from Scripture. The criteria of canonicity (at least for the NT) excludes any other addition into the canon. There's simply nothing to compete with the books of the New Testament.

Certainly.

 

[Strong in Him]

Are you familiar with the number of books removed from scripture?
I am saying about 3 ideas have yet to be removed.

No books were removed; several didn't get in and a couple nearly didn't. (I'm not talking about the apocrypha, which is a separate issue.)
And nothing will be removed now. The canon of Scripture was closed hundreds of years ago. So again, does our Bible contain errors - did the Holy Spirit make a mistake?

 

[Strong in Him]

God's Holy Spirit is not something we can apply to other people
or have specific expectations of how it should apply to them.
It is only an entity we can allow into our lives.

So I'll take that as a "yes" then.

Jesus clearly called the Spirit "he", and spoke of him as the Spirit of truth who will live in us, lead us to the truth and witness to Jesus, who is the truth. Paul said that he will live in us and witness to us that we are God's children. He taught we are to walk in the Spirit, be filled with the Spirit, show the fruit of the Spirit, use the gifts of the Spirit, should not grieve or quench the Spirit. Jesus said that sin against the Spirit cannot be forgiven. All of this implies, to me, a personal Holy Spirit, not a vague entity or some kind of unreliable force.

You cannot trust Gods Holy Spirit to follow your expectations
in anything.

Except in telling the truth about God. Jesus said that he is the Spirit of truth and that he would take reveal the things of God to us.
The Spirit is God. If we don't trust him to tell, and reveal, God, God's word and God's truth to us; if we don't believe Jesus' words about what the Spirit would do, then we aren't trusting God himself.

To say that our understanding of scripture is perfect
does not even take into account it's already been translated.

The number of times Scripture has been translated into other languages has nothing to do with our understanding of it. There are plenty of books/sources around which can tell us the meaning of the original Greek. There are also books on exegesis and on how to study and understand Scripture - if you're interested enough to find out.

Scripture puts into words that which is perfect and the message
of God's love for us and will not be damaged by any writer or editor.

Yes, and neither will it be compromised by "mistakes". Whatever is in Scripture is meant to be in Scripture.

It that respect, the scriptures are without flaw no matter what
language they may get translated into.

So Paul wasn't in error then? His words, which are in Scripture, always have been in Scripture, will remain in Scripture and have been read by millions of people are NOT an error? Because if they are then the Bible DOES contain a flaw.

And you're right; the Spirit will preserve and communicate God's truth, no matter what the language. He will prevent mistakes from being made - and prevented mistakes from getting into Scripture in the first place.

 

[SkyWriting]

Jesus clearly called the Spirit "he", and spoke of him as the Spirit of truth who will live in us, lead us to the truth and witness to Jesus, who is the truth. Paul said that he will live in us and witness to us that we are God's children. He taught we are to walk in the Spirit, be filled with the Spirit, show the fruit of the Spirit, use the gifts of the Spirit, should not grieve or quench the Spirit. Jesus said that sin against the Spirit cannot be forgiven. All of this implies, to me, a personal Holy Spirit, not a vague entity or some kind of unreliable force.

Very unreliable. If fact there is almost nothing we can predict about what God
has in store for us or others. We can have faith that Gods Holy Spirit will remain
with us come hell or high water. But that is one of the very few things we can rely
on as far as how God will operate.

Except in telling the truth about God. Jesus said that he is the Spirit of truth and that he would take reveal the things of God to us. The Spirit is God. If we don't trust him to tell, and reveal, God, God's word and God's truth to us; if we don't believe Jesus' words about what the Spirit would do, then we aren't trusting God himself.

Jesus said he would see to it that scripture remained perfect?

The number of times Scripture has been translated into other languages has nothing to do with our understanding of it.
There are plenty of books/sources around which can tell us the meaning of the original Greek. There are also books on exegesis and on how to study and understand Scripture - if you're interested enough to find out.

"Has nothing to do with our understanding" and "books/sources which can tell us the meaning of the original Greek." are two ideas in bold conflict.

Yes, and neither will it be compromised by "mistakes". Whatever is in Scripture is meant to be in Scripture.

My minister often said that in sermons. According to the law, there can be no gender based rules. So Paul was wrong, those who included it in scripture were wrong, and those who violate the law are wrong. But being men, it's not surprising.

And you're right; the Spirit will preserve and communicate God's truth, no matter what the language. He will prevent mistakes from being made - and prevented mistakes from getting into Scripture in the first place.

It's not my place to judge the law or judge scripture.

Luke 6:31English Standard Version (ESV)
31 And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

Here you can see that gender based guidelines, ordinances , or laws can only be applied
to others, in the same extent you would like for them to apply these same rules to you.

 

[SkyWriting]

The canon of Scripture was closed hundreds of years ago.

The Holy Spirit was asleep at the wheel until 100's of years ago?
I don't find any guidelines for canonizing scripture inside of scripture.
Is that not odd?

 

[Strong in Him]

Very unreliable. If fact there is almost nothing we can predict about what God
has in store for us or others.

Not at all.
We can't tell God how to answer our prayers, we can't give our lives to him and then tell him what to do with them, or place restrictions on how we will serve him. But he is totally trustworthy and reliable.
He can be trusted to keep his promises.
He can be trusted to keep his word.
He can be trusted to love us.
He can be trusted when he talks about eternal life, judgement and the life hereafter.
We can trust in his love, his truth, his faithfulness and reliability, his holiness, his grace, mercy, power and indeed in all that he is.
We can trust that the One who created us knows what is best for us.
We can trust that he will DO what is best for us, even if we can't see it ourselves.
We can trust in his presence, even if our feelings tell us otherwise.

Jesus said he would see to it that scripture remained perfect?

Jesus told his disciples that the Spirit of truth would lead them into all truth, that he would remind them of everything that Jesus had said and that he would take from what belonged to Jesus and give it to them. As well as this, he spent 40 days after his resurrection personally teaching the 11 disciples. I firmly believe he would have taught and inspired Paul in the same way - maybe during the 3 years that Paul spent in the desert.
Scripture reveals God. It was inspired by the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth. So yes, it is inerrant - otherwise how would we know what to trust and which bits to believe?

"Has nothing to do with our understanding" and "books/sources which can tell us the meaning of the original Greek." are two ideas in bold conflict.

No they're not.
A book can tells us the Greek word for love - actually there was more than one - and which word is being used in various verses. It cannot tell us how we understand love; there may be people who've never experienced it, or who always equate love with sex and so have real problems with the phrase "God is love".
A book can tell us the meaning of the Greek words for "silent" and "snatch authority"; we can learn what Paul meant when he wrote 1 Timothy 2:12, and indeed any other verse. That book won't tell us what I, you or Joe Bloggs down the road understands by those verses or how, or if, we intend to apply them.
Someone in another forum has been saying how God hates people, and quoted the verse "I have loved Jacob and hated Esau" as proof. Several of us have said, having read books and commentaries, that "hating" does not refer to the negative emotion of intense dislike, but in the fact that God did not choose Esau to be the father of the tribes of Israel, from whom the Messiah would eventually be descended. Those books told us the real meaning behind the words. But they can't prevent someone from reading those words, now or in the future, and saying "there you are; God HATES".

Even in everyday life someone can say a sentence and 2 people take it in 2 different ways or see different meanings in it.

My minister often said that in sermons. According to the law, there can be no gender based rules. So Paul was wrong, those who included it in scripture were wrong, and those who violate the law are wrong. But being men, it's not surprising.

IF God had been saying to Paul, "in my church I do not allow women to be ordained", then that's how it would be; unless you're accusing the Creator of mankind and founder of the church of sexual discrimination. IF God wanted his church to be led only by English speaking men with blue eyes, blond hair and one leg, then that's how it would be. He is Lord, it's his church and he has the perfect right to say that.
But he hasn't.
And if Paul was wrong, then we have some wrong words/sentences/thoughts in Scripture; God's holy word. If the Spirit of truth has allowed this, how do we know what other errors there might be, and how do we know what to believe?

The verse, "always treat others as you want them to treat you" is good in most cases. But what if someone hated themselves and believed they didn't have a right to be happy, or if they were anorexic, believed they were fat and were starving themselves, or were brought up to believe that women were useless and they'd never be able to achieve anything - is that how they should treat others?
If you apply that verse to 1 Timothy 2:12; there are women who say, "I don't want to be a teacher or lead a church, so because I would want this for me, I'm not going to force it on others".
That is not the same as saying that GOD doesn't want it.

 

[Strong in Him]

The Holy Spirit was asleep at the wheel until 100's of years ago?

No, the Spirit was poured out on all at Pentecost and has been active ever since - and in fact even before then.
Meaning that he was active, and awake, when men were praying and debating the writings that should be included in the Bible.

I don't find any guidelines for canonizing scripture inside of scripture.
Is that not odd?

No.
Jesus sent the Spirit to remind the disciples of all he had taught them; he made provision for their future writings and teachings. He did not say "many years after you have died, people will come along and put all of your writings into one book, and this is how YOU can make sure they do it right." He made provision for that too - the same Spirit who inspired the disciples would also inspire all future disciples.

 

[Imagican]

You may ask my great Grand Child.
But I'm able to handle epic dance moves,
so you may get confused.

You are correct in this: since I began to read your comments, I have certainly been 'confused'.

No cheek turning has been mentioned.

It's the same principle you continually try to introduce. "Let someone do unto you so you can do unto them?????" But you can't see the principle?

Stop thy coy innocence of thy scripture!
King James Bible
Therefore all things whatsoever
ye would that men should do to you,
do ye even so to them:
for this is the law and the prophets.

American Standard Version
All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Luke 6:31
And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

Galatians 5:14 For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

But your comments indicate that you don't understand what this means. The entire principle of 'do unto others' presupposes that one is sharing 'love'. There is no love in 'doing' to others that which does not involve 'love'. So the foundation of 'doing unto others' is 'love'.

Romans 13:8-10 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loves another has fulfilled the law...

Weymouth New Testament
And behave to your fellow men just as you would have them behave to you.

Galatians 5:13,14 For, brothers, you have been called to liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another...

Lets hypothesize that you are a women reading this:

All things therefore whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them: for this is the law and the prophets.

Now. As of this reading, all gender related discrimination of any kind is ruled out. Unless you're a woman and want to be told to shut up. Odds are slim on that. Gender based rules are history.

Discrimination? Where have you found 'that word' in the Bible? It's not about discrimination for the potter to choose the design he will place into the clay. See, you sort of make it clear that you simply don't 'like' THAT concept. You make it clear that you aren't satisfied with 'God's order' He placed into 'creation' and would create one 'of your own'. And if you cannot show through scripture that God somehow 'changed' the 'order' He placed into creation, then it is 'you' that are creating such an idea, not God or His Word.

First, in order to offer what you have offered pertaining to 'gender', you are forced to ignore or consider everything else 'gender specific' invalid. Yet you say you are not 'cherry picking'? You say that Paul was immature or that his words are invalid yet the only evidence you offer is 'your own ideas' that don't match what Paul offered.

The beginning of God's Word deals with 'rules' specific to gender and the Hebrews and Jews followed these rules for thousands of years. Heck, the whole world has followed these rules until very very recently so far as history is concerned. Mistake? The entire human race has been following the wrong patter for the entire time they have been in existence? Until the past hundred years? Come now. You don't really expect 'anyone' to follow such a concept do you?

Nothing you have offered is 'backed' by scripture. You have 'chosen' individual lines and then 'made up' what you want them to mean.

But the 'truth' is that we are to compare 'all scripture' to each other in order to come to proper understanding. You have chosen to ignore 'all scripture' that has the capacity to lead you in a proper direction in understanding. And everyone following this conversation has tried to explain this to you.

You don't need to 'make' me read the Bible. I have read the 'entire' Bible more times than I have kept track of. Actually read through the entire Bible probably a dozen times on individual studies.

It is not my refusal to 'read' the Bible that causes the differences in our understanding I can assure you. It is your refusal to compare scripture to scripture that has caused you to form understanding that is 'not' offered through scripture in it's totality. You have formed an agenda and it is your agenda that has led to your misunderstanding.

Is it 'guilt' that has led you down this path? In order to conceal it you have somehow convinced yourself that it's OK to do 'bad things' to others if you are willing for others to 'do' bad things to you? For there is no such concept in the Bible. So there must be 'something' other than the Bible that has led you to this false conclusion. Your understanding of 'love' seems to be completely askew from the words you offer. There is 'no' love in doing 'bad things' to people simply because you are willing to accept them doing 'bad' things to you. That concept is 'not' one you obtained through the Bible. You have chosen to focus on a few sentences that have allowed you to form such an 'idea' but in 'truth', if you compare what you offer to the totality of scripture, the idea does not exist.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Strong in Him,

It is obvious that you see the error in what Skywriting has interjected in defense of 'women' being 'equal' to men. And just look at the extremes he has offered in trying to defend what he believes. Most of what he has offered couldn't be further from the truth we have been offered in the Bible. He has chosen to pick and choose individual lines and then create his own doctrine using the lines that match what he 'wants' to believe.

I'm not here to debate individual beliefs. I'll certainly point out contradiction when I see it and expose it as such.

But I believe you can clearly see that the 'ideas' that have been offered by this individual are no where close to Biblical. Your words in defense of the 'truth' make it clear that the idea that Paul didn't have any idea of the Holy Spirit and was simply speaking 'personal opinion' or understanding of 'his own' is ludicrous from the standpoint of anyone that believes that the Bible is the 'Word' of God.

Paul was specifically chosen by Christ to be one of the few chosen to 'start' the Church. And it is pretty clear through the sacrifices that he made that he was certainly devoted to his 'calling'.

I offer this response to point out what this person has offered in order to insist that there is no 'gender order' created by God. And most often, it is the same with any and everyone that tries to follow such a 'path' when it comes to understanding. For anyone that has read the Bible, it is perfectly clear that the ideas offered by Skywriting are 'not' understanding offered through the Bible 'in truth'. Only by ignoring the scripture that contradicts such ideas and altering what 'is offered' could one come to such conclusions. Therefore, the ideas are 'not' Biblical. Utter confusion in fact. And God is 'not' the author of confusion. And something that I continually try to point out: "If God is not the 'author of confusion', then 'who is'?

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Strong in Him]

Strong in Him,
It is obvious that you see the error in what Skywriting has interjected in defense of 'women' being 'equal' to men.

Not exactly. If I read it correctly, Skywriting is saying that Paul was wrong to say that women should be silent - on the grounds if "treat others as you would like them to treat you - and that those who allowed these verses to remain in Scripture, were also wrong.
My objection isn't about his views on women, but the idea that the Spirit would allow error in Scripture and therefore that the word of God contains mistakes.

Your words in defense of the 'truth' make it clear that the idea that Paul didn't have any idea of the Holy Spirit and was simply speaking 'personal opinion' or understanding of 'his own' is ludicrous from the standpoint of anyone that believes that the Bible is the 'Word' of God.

I don't believe Paul was offering his own opinion, even though he said "I do not permit ....". I believe that his words were inspired by God - but, here's the thing, God's solution to that situation in that place at that time and NOT a command or prophecy to apply to every church many years into the future. I'm not sure they were literally applicable to all local churches either - why does he say that women should be silent, for example, when he has already taught how they should pray and prophesy?

Paul writes other things that are clearly personal in nature - "don't forget to bring my coat and my scrolls", for example. I think his exasperated comment that agitators should go and castrate themselves was also a personal remark; I can't imagine that being inspired by the Spirit. But these personal comments do not make the Bible any less the word of God.

Paul was specifically chosen by Christ to be one of the few chosen to 'start' the Church.

No, the church was already going strong before Paul was even converted. It started with the 11 disciples, had risen to 120 by Pentecost, grew by 3,000 in one day, and grew daily.
It was the church that Saul of Tarsus was persecuting - well, it was Jesus, but through the church.

 

[SkyWriting]

Discrimination? Where have you found 'that word' in the Bible? It's not about discrimination for the potter to choose the design he will place into the clay. See, you sort of make it clear that you simply don't 'like' THAT concept. You make it clear that you aren't satisfied with 'God's order' He placed into 'creation' and would create one 'of your own'. And if you cannot show through scripture that God somehow 'changed' the 'order' He placed into creation, then it is 'you' that are creating such an idea, not God or His Word.

First, in order to offer what you have offered pertaining to 'gender', you are forced to ignore or consider everything else 'gender specific' invalid. Yet you say you are not 'cherry picking'? You say that Paul was immature or that his words are invalid yet the only evidence you offer is 'your own ideas' that don't match what Paul offered.

The beginning of God's Word deals with 'rules' specific to gender and the Hebrews and Jews followed these rules for thousands of years. Heck, the whole world has followed these rules until very very recently so far as history is concerned. Mistake? The entire human race has been following the wrong patter for the entire time they have been in existence? Until the past hundred years? Come now. You don't really expect 'anyone' to follow such a concept do you?

Nothing you have offered is 'backed' by scripture. You have 'chosen' individual lines and then 'made up' what you want them to mean.

But the 'truth' is that we are to compare 'all scripture' to each other in order to come to proper understanding. You have chosen to ignore 'all scripture' that has the capacity to lead you in a proper direction in understanding. And everyone following this conversation has tried to explain this to you.

You don't need to 'make' me read the Bible. I have read the 'entire' Bible more times than I have kept track of. Actually read through the entire Bible probably a dozen times on individual studies.

It is not my refusal to 'read' the Bible that causes the differences in our understanding I can assure you. It is your refusal to compare scripture to scripture that has caused you to form understanding that is 'not' offered through scripture in it's totality. You have formed an agenda and it is your agenda that has led to your misunderstanding.

Is it 'guilt' that has led you down this path? In order to conceal it you have somehow convinced yourself that it's OK to do 'bad things' to others if you are willing for others to 'do' bad things to you? For there is no such concept in the Bible. So there must be 'something' other than the Bible that has led you to this false conclusion. Your understanding of 'love' seems to be completely askew from the words you offer. There is 'no' love in doing 'bad things' to people simply because you are willing to accept them doing 'bad' things to you. That concept is 'not' one you obtained through the Bible. You have chosen to focus on a few sentences that have allowed you to form such an 'idea' but in 'truth', if you compare what you offer to the totality of scripture, the idea does not exist.

Blessings,

MEC

Discrimination:
I am referring to the definition of discrimination pertaining to the action of discrimination.
I have used the word,
just as found in scripture,
pertaining to discrimination between rich and poor.

3 If you show special attention to the man wearing fine clothes and say, “Here’s a good seat for you,” but say to the poor man, “You stand there” or “Sit on the floor by my feet,” 4 have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?

Let's sum up all of scripture and the prophets for a reminder:

12 In everything, then, do to others as you would have them do to you. For this is the essence of the Law and the prophets. 13 Enter through the narrow gate.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now lets do a Christian test of right and wrong:
In everything, then/poor/, do to /the rich/ as you would have /the rich/ do to you.
In everything, then/the rich/, do to /the poor/ as you would have /the poor/ do to you.
In everything, then /men/, do to /the women/ as you would have /women/ do to you.
For this is the essence of the Law and the prophets.

Do you can see, this eliminates men making rules for women, women making rules for men.
This eliminates illegal discrimination.

There is legal discrimination, and that is for when we DO allow for one group to make
rules for the other. Let's say Vender and customer.

In everything /vender/, then, do to /the customer/ as you would have /the customer/ do to you.

In this case both vendor and customer agree that those without money do not get goods.
We can legally discriminate against those with no money.
But we cannot discriminate against green skin people, if they have money.
Green skin people do not agree.

But gender rules are out by Christian decree:
12 In everything,then,do to others as you would have them do to you.For this is the essence of the Law and the prophets.
13 Enter through the narrow gate.



The rest of your personal commentary is off the topic.