How did Jesus feel about women?

Christ Aficionado · Dec 26, 2004

Evee said:
Does Jesus have the same respect for women as he does men?

Yes. Jesus healed many women in the Gospel accounts. Also, remember the account where he spoke to the woman from Samaria:

John 4
27 And upon this came his disciples, and marvelled that he talked with the woman: yet no man said, What seekest thou? or, Why talkest thou with her? 28 The woman then left her waterpot, and went her way into the city, and saith to the men, 29 Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?

Notice how the diciples marvelled at the fact that he was speaking to woman. According to the Peoples New Testament back in those days "It was considered by the Jews indecorous to talk with a woman in public, and the rabbins held that to talk with such an inferior creature was beneath the dignity of a doctor of the law. This illustrates the state from which woman has been lifted by the Gospel."

Evee said:
What would he think of women pastors??

I don't think Jesus would have any problem with women pastors at all. If you look at the history of the Bible there are many prophetess' mentioned throughout the Old and New Testaments. :preach:

Exodus 15:20 - And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances.

Judges 4:4 - And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time.

2 Kings 22:14 - So Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam, and Achbor, and Shaphan, and Asahiah, went unto Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in Jerusalem in the college

and they communed with her.

2 Chronicles 34:22 - And Hilkiah, and they that the king had appointed, went to Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum the son of Tikvath, the son of Hasrah, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in Jerusalem in the college

and they spake to her to that effect.

Nehemiah 6:14 - My God, think thou upon Tobiah and Sanballat according to these their works, and on the prophetess Noadiah, and the rest of the prophets, that would have put me in fear.

Isaiah 8:3 - And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name Mahershalalhashbaz.

Luke 2:36 - And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a great age, and had lived with an husband seven years from her virginity;

Revelation 2:20 - Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

Evee said:
What would he think of Gay women pastors?

I believe He would consider it against the law.

Evee said:
What would he think of womans right to vote?

I believe He would defintely support it. See my answer to first question above.

Evee · Dec 26, 2004

I agree with you makes perfect sense.

Aimee30 · Dec 26, 2004

Evee said:
Does Jesus have the same respect for women as he does men?

I would think so as he had female followers as well as male. He also talked to a Samaritan woman at a well.

Evee said:
What would he think of women pastors?

I think Paul would have more of problem than he would. I don't believe it mattered too much to Jesus.

Evee said:
What would he think of Gay women pastors?

I don't know what he'd say. I would think he might consider it a bit mixed-up ideaology but that's just me.

Evee said:
What would he think of womans right to vote?

I don't think Jesus would mind this either as he seemed to treat everyone the same way.
I would just read the interaction between Jesus and the woman at the well, Jesus at Mary and Martha's house, and Jesus and the woman caught in adultery (the last one which some mark as doubtful but I think that's due to their beliefs about morality more than anything). It appears to me Jesus didn't differentiate between the two genders.

Aimee30 · Dec 26, 2004

airren1 said:
When I refer to Genesis 2: 20And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. I understand that woman was made as a helper to man, as a compliment, from man. Man is first, woman were made second for his benefit. Maybe I should have gone up a few verse Gen. 18-22 18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.21And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
To me there is no contradiction. I can not deny that Jesus ate and spoke with women, or that women had significant roles in history( a woman was deceived, and decived a man to bite the forbidden fruit, a woman gave birth to Jesus,etc.). My understanding is that the gifts are available to be used by all members, but women may not teach or have authority over a man. There is not a problem, if a woman wanted to spread the Good News to non-believers, children,and other women, but not to the men. The fact that men are the dominate gender was a universal practice. It does not mean that men have the right to treat women anyway they choose, a man of G-D treats his woman very well. It is also mentioned in the Bible, that women tend to be a bit gossipy, and are more fragile than men.
I think that G-D has his reasons, all of which we do not understand, or like in particular. Think about the fact that in ancient times, children were better behaved, and women were, for the most part, modest. Very rarely were homes as dysfunctional as today, although times were hard. G-D made us all with a purpose, we have specific j...obs, all which are important. Selfish ideas are what changed the laws. Instead of being content, women started to want everything. I know very few will agree, but I don't think G-D intended women to have 40 hour a week j...obs, raise children, and do her duties as a wife, including keeping house. As an helper, I understand that the man has his duties, and a woman hers, and they are not the same. If women remained the helpers they were meant to be, instead of trying to be the big bosses and puffed up with so much pride, I do believe that children would be raised up better, marriages would not break up so often, and moral values would not have dissipated so much. Don't get me wrong, men too, have been a contributing factor in the erosion of values. My point is, when people start getting puffed up with pride, doing what they want, and stop following the laws of the scriptures, that is what causes all problems.

Not to be a big downer, but I don't think God designated jobs for men at least not in the beginning. It said basically manking was to be caretakers over all creation.
Also, I know your religion is Jewish, but there is another meaning for the words help and meet, I found that the words said to be this seem to mean opposing aid. I know that it was translated the other way, but I am thinking it originates from what Pharisees basically thought of women.
But if it helps any, if I can find someone rich enough to marry, I'll stop working too. After all, who really likes to go to work nowadays? Every time I find what seems to be a nice job, if I stay too long it turns into a nightmare.

sculpturegirl · Dec 26, 2004

Aimee30 said:
Not to be a big downer, but I don't think God designated jobs for men at least not in the beginning. It said basically manking was to be caretakers over all creation.
Also, I know your religion is Jewish, but there is another meaning for the words help and meet, I found that the words said to be this seem to mean opposing aid. I know that it was translated the other way, but I am thinking it originates from what Pharisees basically thought of women.
But if it helps any, if I can find someone rich enough to marry, I'll stop working too. After all, who really likes to go to work nowadays? Every time I find what seems to be a nice job, if I stay too long it turns into a nightmare.

Aimee- I have read on many occasion about when the two income famil becomes a one income family they basically break even, unless the wife is uberrich. When someone is left home to care for the home, frugality is easier. Meals are prepared, no added expense for childcare, no commute, no special uniform, etc. It is possible

Evee · Dec 26, 2004

Thanks everyone great answers and scriptures too.
Extra bonus.

Johnnz · Dec 26, 2004

Zug-Zwang said:
There is a big flaw in what you say.G-d said let us make man in our image and you relate that to being Adam and Eve,but G-d has 3 players so it appears you left out one.There was another creature in the garden also.

Sorry, but I miss your point. Just look at the words of Scripture in Genesis.

Gen 1:26-27
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
NIV

Where does your mention of the third creature arise in this account?

John
NZ

Evee · Dec 26, 2004

Johnnz said:
Sorry, but I miss your point. Just look at the words of Scripture in Genesis.

Gen 1:26-27
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
NIV

Where does your mention of the third creature arise in this account?

John

NZ

I wonder if he meant The snake or Satan.

Mustaphile · Dec 26, 2004

I think that much is being revealed about the role of women in the life of Jesus through the new scholarship concerning Mary Magdalene. There is certainly evidence that her role in the birth and spread of christianity was pivotal. Recent scholarship seems to suggest that she was slandered by later generations in an effort to play down her role, and that some feel she had rightful claim to the title of Apostle. My own personal hunch is that much of what was written about Mary Magdalene was destroyed or lost, simply because she was a woman in patriarchial times. I hope and pray that more about her role in christianity can be revealed through further scholarship on this matter. She certainly stands as a great inspiration to women and their role in christianity, in the light of our new understanding about her.

Zug-Zwang · Dec 27, 2004

Johnnz said:
Sorry, but I miss your point. Just look at the words of Scripture in Genesis.

Gen 1:26-27
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
NIV

Where does your mention of the third creature arise in this account?

John
NZ

You said {Let Us}, who do you mean? G-d,Holy spirit,Jesus? How do you relate that Adam and Eve represent the image of G-d if G-d's image is a trinity? What about Adam and Eve represent the image of G-d?

merryheart · Dec 27, 2004

sculpturegirl said:
Aimee- I have read on many occasion about when the two income famil becomes a one income family they basically break even, unless the wife is uberrich. When someone is left home to care for the home, frugality is easier. Meals are prepared, no added expense for childcare, no commute, no special uniform, etc. It is possible

The break even point is somewhere around 9 or 10 $ per hr. And assumes that there are at least 2 children, because that figure includes daycare.

Many times a woman out earns a man... I out earn my husband, and I am far from uberrich. My mother before me also out earned my father - by at least triple... She isn't uberrich either, but was definitely better educated.

Johnnz · Dec 27, 2004

Yes, the statement in Genesis does indicate the Trinity. My questions also is what do you make of those Scriptures?

My understanding is that in making both male and female and then declaring that male and female together contain the image of God, Scripture teaches that it required the different expressions of maleness and femaleness to express the Divine nature. God is referred to in feminine terms in Scripture several times. He could not have created femaleness unless that was also part of His Being.

As individuals each man and woman is a trinity.

Gen 2:7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
NIV

Here we see a body, the receiving of a personal spirit, and then a living being. Human life is the interaction between the spirit and the body which produces the richness of human life (our soul). When the bosy can no loner sustain life its spirit leaves and te person dies.

John
NZ

Zug-Zwang · Dec 27, 2004

Johnnz said:
Yes, the statement in Genesis does indicate the Trinity. My questions also is what do you make of those Scriptures?

My understanding is that in making both male and female and then declaring that male and female together contain the image of God, Scripture teaches that it required the different expressions of maleness and femaleness to express the Divine nature. God is referred to in feminine terms in Scripture several times. He could not have created femaleness unless that was also part of His Being.

As individuals each man and woman is a trinity.

Gen 2:7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
NIV

Here we see a body, the receiving of a personal spirit, and then a living being. Human life is the interaction between the spirit and the body which produces the richness of human life (our soul). When the bosy can no loner sustain life its spirit leaves and te person dies.

John
NZ

1st Peter 3-4,speaking to women he say let it be let your actions be from the hidden man of the heart of a gentle and quiet spirit.Both man and women as you say are in fact a trinity or triad.Both men and women have the hidden man of the heart.This hidden man wasn't hidden before the fall,He was Adam the spiritual covering of the flesh.When they ate the fruit G-d said they would die but it was the spirit that was surpressed and they realized they were naked for the first time because they no longer had a spirit covering.All of us are female in that we have a fleshly body and we all are male because we all have the hidden man.The most beautifiul creature in the garden also fell,it was the spirit or mind of the flesh still innocent but now Our minds slither along the ground like snakes and considering Jesus told Peter to get behind me Satan prooves that the serpant is a part of us all.The serpant was the mouthpiece of Satan and his thoughts tempted eve and she spoke wrongly to Adam just like Peters thoughts were wrong and Jesus recognized who was speaking.When Yeshuah came,he came as Eve in the flesh and he killed the flesh but when he rose,he rose as Adam was in the beginning having a spirit covering the flesh.

Zug-Zwang · Dec 27, 2004

Johnnz said:
Yes, the statement in Genesis does indicate the Trinity. My questions also is what do you make of those Scriptures?

My understanding is that in making both male and female and then declaring that male and female together contain the image of God, Scripture teaches that it required the different expressions of maleness and femaleness to express the Divine nature. God is referred to in feminine terms in Scripture several times. He could not have created femaleness unless that was also part of His Being.

As individuals each man and woman is a trinity.

Gen 2:7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
NIV

Here we see a body, the receiving of a personal spirit, and then a living being. Human life is the interaction between the spirit and the body which produces the richness of human life (our soul). When the bosy can no loner sustain life its spirit leaves and te person dies.

John
NZ

In the law we are commanded to write the torah on our front doors and at Passover we are commanded to splash blood over our doors.This comes from Ada and Eve.Rib in hebrew denotes 2 things,A sword and one who writes scrolls.When Adam was laid down in a sleep of death to bring about a bride ,G-d took from him a rib{sword} and circumsized his heart writing the law on his heart.In Hebrew sleep also means exile meaning that Adam was in exile until he returned to meet his wife just like a Jewish marrige where the husband goes away and prepares a place.But Adam broke this covenant and the laws of the heart and there was a need for a Passover lamb,So G-d killed the Passover lamb to cloth Adam and Eve looking foreward to the future of G-d coming and dying and once again giving man a spirit covering.

leecappella · Dec 28, 2004

Evee said:
Does Jesus have the same respect for women as he does men?
What would he think of women pastors?
What would he think of Gay women pastors?
What would he think of womans right to vote?
I like to Know what Jesus would think and do.
I am reading but not so many answers yet.
If you have scriptures they would be appreciated.
If not your opionion is good to hear too.

It's not easy saying what Jesus would do or how he feels on all things. He knows more than we and he has the full picture. We don't. WWJD is a great thing, but we cannot always know the answer to that abbreviated question. That's all I wanted to say

cabbitgrrrl · Dec 28, 2004

airren1 said:
According to biblical teachings, if a woman was a widow the people of the community were supposed to help them. So if the teachings were followed you would not find a widow out in the streets with her family.

the problem is, not all of the people are going to follow all of the scriptures, so we must find something else that does work

airren1 said:
People were never intended to be so individualistic as we are today. We are taught to be like one.

we werent intended to be individualistic? might I ask you to prove that?

airren1 said:
In this day and age, we are not going have good moral values as it is written that each generation will get worse, as it has.

that is a matter of opinion

Johnnz · Dec 29, 2004

Zug-Zwang said:
In the law we are commanded to write the torah on our front doors and at Passover we are commanded to splash blood over our doors.This comes from Ada and Eve.Rib in hebrew denotes 2 things,A sword and one who writes scrolls.When Adam was laid down in a sleep of death to bring about a bride ,G-d took from him a rib{sword} and circumsized his heart writing the law on his heart.In Hebrew sleep also means exile meaning that Adam was in exile until he returned to meet his wife just like a Jewish marrige where the husband goes away and prepares a place.But Adam broke this covenant and the laws of the heart and there was a need for a Passover lamb,So G-d killed the Passover lamb to cloth Adam and Eve looking foreward to the future of G-d coming and dying and once again giving man a spirit covering.

You have a method of intepretation that does not fit easily with me. Let me explain.

I am familiar with the concepts of types, where a earlier event prefigures a more complete fulfillment, predominantly in Christ. The basic interpretative principle here is that the type must have a specfic fulfillment (antitype) that is taught in the NT.

I also have contact with material from several Messianic Jews, who have blessed me with their understanding of the OT. None of them adopts your intepretative method.

Your approach is allegorical. This approach has been adopted by some within the Church since the 2nd Century. Its dangers are that it is possible for a person's own construction to intrude (intragesis) rather than providing an explanation of what the text actually says (exegesis). Many errors have, and still occur when Christians adopt the allegorical method of intepretation of Scripture. Consequently, it is a method that I do not use as my basis for understanding Scripture.

I have enjoyed your comments, and they have challened me to think afresh on the Genesis story. Thank you.

John
NZ

Zug-Zwang · Dec 29, 2004

Johnnz said:
You have a method of intepretation that does not fit easily with me. Let me explain.

I am familiar with the concepts of types, where a earlier event prefigures a more complete fulfillment, predominantly in Christ. The basic interpretative principle here is that the type must have a specfic fulfillment (antitype) that is taught in the NT.

I also have contact with material from several Messianic Jews, who have blessed me with their understanding of the OT. None of them adopts your intepretative method.

Your approach is allegorical. This approach has been adopted by some within the Church since the 2nd Century. Its dangers are that it is possible for a person's own construction to intrude (intragesis) rather than providing an explanation of what the text actually says (exegesis). Many errors have, and still occur when Christians adopt the allegorical method of intepretation of Scripture. Consequently, it is a method that I do not use as my basis for understanding Scripture.

I have enjoyed your comments, and they have challened me to think afresh on the Genesis story. Thank you.

John
NZ

Thanks for your comments,I got that rib bit from Rabbi Messer from Simchat Toah ministries.But the part about G-d killing the animal to clothe Adam and Eve is just what happened.You are right that my approach is allegorical alot of the times but that's how the bible approaches us because it's in Paralbles.Everything means something,The first clothing led to Yeshuah and that is quite a reach in itself.Without adopting an allegorical method of interpretation you have no Passover lamb.I alwaysed wondered at the desciples because they didn't realize what was about to happen or who they were dealing with and I'm sure I'll be surprized in the future.I think that if a concept is true you will find it happening many times and the big ones always go back to the garden.I try to find 3's in every story and they are always there from the sons of Adam,sons of Noah to the 3 times males have to appear in Jerusalem to the 3 festivals that take place within the 3 sections of the temple to the transfiguation.I don't know Johnns but I believe that the most beautiful creature was a part of us and it always brings me back to Yeshua calling Peter Satan.I came to that conclusion myself and it's the minority but I'm pretty convinced.

CaDan · Dec 30, 2004

airren1 said:
I think that G-D has his reasons, all of which we do not understand, or like in particular. Think about the fact that in ancient times, children were better behaved, and women were, for the most part, modest. Very rarely were homes as dysfunctional as today, although times were hard.

I respectfully disagree.

airren1 said:
G-D made us all with a purpose, we have specific jobs, all which are important. Selfish ideas are what changed the laws. Instead of being content, women started to want everything. I know very few will agree, but I don't think G-D intended women to have 40 hour a week jobs, raise children, and do her duties as a wife, including keeping house.

Your understanding of human history is woefully deficient. You are retrojecting Victorian fantasies of the "duties as a wife" (which, in reality, were "duties" only available to a small number of upper-class families) to the early Roman Empire. You will find, upon doing a bit of research, that there really is no distinction in the labors of men and women in agricultural and feudal societies.

airren1 said:
As an helper, I understand that the man has his duties, and a woman hers, and they are not the same. If women remained the helpers they were meant to be, instead of trying to be the big bosses and puffed up with so much pride, I do believe that children would be raised up better, marriages would not break up so often, and moral values would not have dissipated so much.

More Victorian fantasies, I am afraid. And wholly inadequate for an understanding of paul's writings in the early Roman Empire.

airren1 said:
Don't get me wrong, men too, have been a contributing factor in the erosion of values. My point is, when people start getting puffed up with pride, doing what they want, and stop following the laws of the scriptures, that is what causes all problems.

Would that be the radical equality propounded by Paul in Galatians and Corinthians?

Johnnz · Dec 31, 2004

Zug-Zwang said:
Thanks for your comments,I got that rib bit from Rabbi Messer from Simchat Toah ministries.But the part about G-d killing the animal to clothe Adam and Eve is just what happened.You are right that my approach is allegorical alot of the times but that's how the bible approaches us because it's in Paralbles.Everything means something,The first clothing led to Yeshuah and that is quite a reach in itself.Without adopting an allegorical method of interpretation you have no Passover lamb.I alwaysed wondered at the desciples because they didn't realize what was about to happen or who they were dealing with and I'm sure I'll be surprized in the future.I think that if a concept is true you will find it happening many times and the big ones always go back to the garden.I try to find 3's in every story and they are always there from the sons of Adam,sons of Noah to the 3 times males have to appear in Jerusalem to the 3 festivals that take place within the 3 sections of the temple to the transfiguation.I don't know Johnns but I believe that the most beautiful creature was a part of us and it always brings me back to Yeshua calling Peter Satan.I came to that conclusion myself and it's the minority but I'm pretty convinced.

Hi,

Not all the Bible is in parables. Some is historical, some is poetic, some is prophetic, some is teaching, some is in a literary format (eg Job) as a device to portray some teaching. It is important to distinguish carefully.

As I said before, I have no issue with types and a NT antitype. The Book of Hebrews is a good example of both. Here we get OT types with their fulfillment in Christ clearly referred to. I do see the significance of the original Passover as a precussor to Christ, the complete Passover. I also see the feast of Passover as being fulfilled at the time of Christ's death, the Feast of Pentecost as being fulfilled on the Day of pentecost as recorded in Acts, and the final feast of tabernacles as yet to be fulfilled with the return of Christ and the restoration of Israel to their Messiah, as other examples.

I require a degree of objectivity for my principles of interpretation. I find this in an historical/literary approach to Scripture, where each passage is given the meaning it would have had, as far as we can determine, to its original audience. Only then can we draw valid principles for us to apply to our lives today. There is far too much 'verse plucking' to support a preconceived viewpoint (this forum provides an abundance of examples) in many Christian circles. There is also too much teaching that depends on the authority and traditions of religious experts, who can then construct their own religious empires and influence. Subjective principles of interpretation fuel both processes.

I also accept that themes are repeated in many ways throughout Scripture. Numbers are important, not just three. Numerical patterns are found throughout Scripture.

I don't accept your intepretation of Jesus words to Peter "Get behind me Satan". Satan is a distinct being, who has his own sphere of rule (the kingdom of darkness). Unbeknown to Peter, Satan had briefly inflitrated Peter's thoughts. Jesus recognised that fact and spoke accordingly. There are numerous incidents in the NT where Jesus confrinted and spoke to other spirit beings, and they to Him.

John
NZ

How did Jesus feel about women?

Active Member

Well-Known Member

That's Me in the Corner

That's Me in the Corner

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

bookworm nerdgirl

Senior Veteran

Active Member

Active Member

&amp;lt;font size=&amp;quot;3&amp;quot ;&amp;gt;DO

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Active Member

I remember orange CF

Senior Veteran

Similar threads

<font size="3&quot ;>DO