Does God want us to live in a patriarchal society ?

[2PhiloVoid]

OK sorry I did not think it was a test to find the author but actually to understand what was being said. I got all that was said lol. In fact I got what was being said from the first few minutes. So I re looked and still think the same even after knowing the source.

Primarily she is making a case that the bible supports equal gender roles. Both men and women are made in Gods image and of equal worth. That bible verses can be twisted to promote control and abuse. That Jesus often treated women equally by the example of Mary at Jesus feet. I understand the reasoning and this is a common approach.

Was there some other lesson or understanding we are suppose to get from this. I am not sure your point on why I should know the author. Was I suppose to go and look her up as well.

So you criticise that I don't look at all the video and then you do the same to my evidence. Or at least have the same attitude that its not worth looking at to the end or in this case not at all. Hum how can anyone have a fair discussion under those rules. All you did was make a personal jibe and nothing about my comments.

I t was a joke. It seems your getting all flustered over me missing the end of your video. Sorry gee. I said I understood the gist of it. I'm too scared to ask which one I missed lol. And thats not being snarky. I honestly was confused about the urgency that I missed tow sources.

I regard sources as like an independent link to a paper or arguement or something like that. Not womens names in the bible. If this was the criteria then we have 100s of mens names in the bible as examples.

I was confused by the other women source. They referred to a Pew research but that was not a women. Anyway.

You have been antagonistic from the start. I never said anything to you. I just stated my reasoning and thats it. Then you start attacking my motives and misrepresenting what I said and moralising that I did not do this or that.

But you know in all this I still engaged and looked twice at the video and took time to reason out where I am at and how I have a different view on all the back and forth from each side.

You have not. You just dismissed it all and did not even engage.

In fact you are so preoccupied with the very stuff I am talking about and not bothering to give my view the time of day that you completely missed what I was saying. Let me put it in simple terms.

I disagree with the whole thing of the back and forth arguements using the bible examples to outdo the opposing sides to prove their take on the interpretation is the truth. I agree with all the examples the video presented. Have no issues. Its that people can make counter ones to this and it never ends. This never resolves the issue.

I am not on either side and don't want to participate anymore. It never ends and is always the same. In 50 years it will not change as people believe what they believe.

So I disagree with the entire approach from both sides of the debate and don't want to participate in the constant back and forth fighting.

So you are actually attacking me for not wanting to engage in the kinds of hermeneutics I think don't even work as a method of proving anything for either side. You missed that.

What do you want me to do now, brother Steve?

 

[stevevw]

You are in luck, chatting in threads on CF is an entirely optional activity. You do not want to do it, that is okay. The OP of this one is a question, people were always going to provide their opinions in response.

Yes or you don't have to not paricipate or agree with certain ideas or approaches but still remain in the thread and offer alternatives ideas and approaches.

 

[stevevw]

What do you want me to do now, brother Steve?

Nothing really. Still offer your ideas and views as everyone has the right to do so. I just don't think all the back and forth examples and counter examples which are still more of less the same and still not changing peoples beliefs is going to be effective.

Not that people can still do this. I just personally am not sure its a good idea anymore after participating myself in such exchanges. In some ways its like people fighting over which flavor icecream is best. Or which movie is best. Its a personal belief and can never be resolved.

What one person believes is abuse and control the other thinks there is none. Like two completely different paradigms or worldviews or religions fighting. How can this be ever sorted.

But the one thing I do know is that such an approach fosters division and division is the very sign that Christ is not among the people. So despite good intentions overall it actually creates a divided society and church and therefore the methodology is what is the problem.

Thus I think a different approach which is independent of personal or group subjective opinion and beliefs as the tie breaker. That way its not personal, not subjective and is something like any fact, something people cannot argue with.

But mostly it helps resolve or at least brings some qualification besides opinion that people may respect more and accept and perhaps help see things in a different light. I think lack of information and understanding is part of the problem as well and the more info the more people see the full picture.

Maybe I am just sick of all the division and fighting with recent events.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Nothing really. Still offer your ideas and views as everyone has the right to do so. I just don't think all the back and forth examples and counter examples which are still more of less the same and still not changing peoples beliefs is going to be effective.

Not that people can still do this. I just personally am not sure its a good idea anymore after participating myself in such exchanges. In some ways its like people fighting over which flavor icecream is best. Or which movie is best. Its a personal belief and can never be resolved.

What one person believes is abuse and control the other thinks there is none. Like two completely different paradigms or worldviews or religions fighting. How can this be ever sorted.

There's more than two perspectives at odds here, Steve. That's part of the problem.

But the one thing I do know is that such an approach fosters division and division is the very sign that Christ is not among the people. So despite good intentions overall it actually creates a divided society and church and therefore the methodology is what is the problem.

Thus I think a different approach which is independent of personal or group subjective opinion and beliefs as the tie breaker. That way its not personal, not subjective and is something like any fact, something people cannot argue with.

I agree. That's why you don't see me relying on solipsistic (rather than merely subjective) opinion. I prefer facts and evidence over speculation, untested theories or unproven dogma.

But mostly it helps resolve or at least brings some qualification besides opinion that people may respect more and accept and perhaps help see things in a different light. I think lack of information and understanding is part of the problem as well and the more info the more people see the full picture.

Maybe I am just sick of all the division and fighting with recent events.

Me too.

 

[stevevw]

There's more than two perspectives at odds here, Steve. That's part of the problem.

I think I already acknowledged that when I said that there are many groups and denominations divided over the issues. That is the problem. When you take into consideration all views and beliefs its too hard to deal with.

If the matter requires some determination one way or another than the idea that this is a matter of subjective opinion or belief is itself a mind field that can never be sorted. You just have to accept that there are many positions and so be it.

But to then try and argue or fight over those different opinions and beliefs like there is a truth to be established seems counter productive. Because the very idea that there is one truth will be against the idea that there are many beliefs that should be included in the market place. Whats the use in fighting over that when its going to cause conflicts lol.

I agree. That's why you don't see me relying on solipsistic (rather than merely subjective) opinion. I prefer facts and evidence over speculation and unproven dogma.

Ok, I agree facts or a reasoned basis is good. But what do you mean by "rather than merely subjective) opinion". Is there a subjective opinion that can be relied on. I mean you could say its all subjective opinion. I agree a self referential and subjective lens can miss a lot thats going on outside you.

But I think there is an aspect of 'self' perhaps through real lived experiences that is like a science in a way. What people would call reality. Like saying to someone "get real". We come to understand certain modes of thinking and behaviour is unreal or unhealthy or even immoral due to our lived experiences over time.

So we have another aspect of understanding ourselves and the world apart from the sciences that is not really science yet is a reality we can know from our experiences. For example we learnt human rights or rather codified them from the bad experiences and evil of wars. They are like laws of physics to us and we don't question them.

So in this sense I think we can look at lived reality and find truths or facts if you like about how weshould be and order ourselves as a society. But science is an additional aspect that should also align. All aspects including the bible should align if it is truth.

Me too.

Yes and I think all the recent trouble and conflicts and divisions and hate and all that makes you think and take a step back and think surely there has to be a another way to sort this out. Then I think of course it is Christ. It always comes back to Christs example.

But I think many may be thinking the same. I think we may see hopefully an uprising or revival if you like and people reflecting and reproving their faith and uniting.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I think I already acknowledged that when I said that there are many groups and denominations divided over the issues. That is the problem. When you take into consideration all views and beliefs its too hard to deal with.

Yes, you correctly alluded earlier to the problem of severe division by correctly citing the fact that we now live in a Postmodern era.

If the matter requires some determination one way or another than the idea that this is a matter of subjective opinion or belief is itself a mind field that can never be sorted. You just have to accept that there are many positions and so be it.

But to then try and argue or fight over those different opinions and beliefs like there is a truth to be established seems counter productive. Because the very idea that there is one truth will be against the idea that there are many beliefs that should be included in the market place. Whats the use in fighting over that when its going to cause conflicts lol.

Exactly. Which is why I keep rolling my eyes when fellow Christians show up unasked and begin to take me to task for not agreeing with them.

Ok, I agree facts or a reasoned basis is good. But what do you mean by "rather than merely subjective) opinion". Is there a subjective opinion that can be relied on. I mean you could say its all subjective opinion. I agree a self referential and subjective lens can miss a lot thats going on outside you.

I mean that the term 'subjective' is shot through with inexact meaning and that it, as well as the term objective, have nuances that often go ignored. So, we end up having folks who confuse a subjective point with solipsism and an objective point with 'truth and fact.'

There is a reason that some Epistemologists aver that we need to move beyond reliance upon terms that don't signify necessarily identify, let alone explain, the fuller nature of any one person's perspective and relation to actual knowledge. This is also why we see some epistemological theorists offer a term, instead, like 'Sobjective,' among other analytic suggestions.

But I think there is an aspect of 'self' perhaps through real lived experiences that is like a science in a way. What people would call reality. Like saying to someone "get real". We come to understand certain modes of thinking and behaviour is unreal or unhealthy or even immoral due to our lived experiences over time.

Yes, some folks do this. In fact, many folks do this, but unfortunately I realize that mental health isn't a commodity among most people, nor is education. So, due to the fragmentation of healthy (Christian) social structures, we see an ever increasing trend toward the behavior your citing.

So we have another aspect of understanding ourselves and the world apart from the sciences that is not really science yet is a reality we can know from our experiences. For example we learnt human rights or rather codified them from the bad experiences and evil of wars. They are like laws of physics to us and we don't question them.

I agree. And it's unfortunate that certain ideas have become unjustified shibboleths, taken off the table for further questioning, testing or development.

So in this sense I think we can look at lived reality and find truths or facts if you like about how weshould be and order ourselves as a society. But science is an additional aspect that should also align. All aspects including the bible should align if it is truth.

I'd like to agree, but because I think 'reality' is too complex and our perceptual engagement is complicated by human limitations, our mere expectation to cull from lived experience various empirical conclusions to live by is expecting too much. This way of thinking, while practical, often leads to sheer Pragmatism, and this sort of expectation often feeds a more secular viewpoint rather than a Christian one.

Yes and I think all the recent trouble and conflicts and divisions and hate and all that makes you think and take a step back and think surely there has to be a another way to sort this out. Then I think of course it is Christ. It always comes back to Christs example.

Sure, but we have to cite the Bible for Christ's example, and didn't you say earlier that you don't think we should be bringing 'Biblical examples' in as evidence supporting one viewpoint against another? Please correct me if I've misunderstood you..........................

But I think many may be thinking the same. I think we may see hopefully an uprising or revival if you like and people reflecting and reproving their faith and uniting.

One can hope. But sadly, I'm more of a Historical Premillennialist and, currently, don't see much in the way of an Amillennial or Postmillennial set of reasons to 'correct' my view of Eschatology.

And as for Patriarchy or Feminism, I think both are problematic and are distortions that are ill-fit for the Christian faith, and Helen Andrews right-leaning theoretical attempt to explain the problem is nothing new, just one more nuance of an already old problem regarding Secularization over and against the Christian faith.