Why did Jesus choose 12 men.

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,733
10,038
78
Auckland
✟379,929.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Unlike Ploverwing most responses are designed to dishonour.
There is clearly little interest in discussing such an important issue.
It seems the cause is much more important than kind sensibilities that might give rise to better understanding..
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Saint Steven
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,217
19,065
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,505,465.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
This is nonsense - most husbands are physically stronger than their wives. The wives are not harmed by this unless there is abuse. In most cases they benefit from the protection it gives them.

*Snort.* I've never needed my husband's physical protection. What on earth from?

That said, you're missing the point. When a husband has more power than his wife - physical, economic, social power, whatever - and instead of involving her in decision making about how that power gets used, deliberately excludes her from that process (which is how he has power over her), then yes, that harms her. Her agency is diminished.

I'll give you an example. Let's say there's a household where a man works and his wife stays home. He earns - this is all just for illustration's sake, the numbers hold no relation to real life - $1000. And from that, he gives her $100 and expects her to manage food, clothing for herself and the children, any medications and other household expenses. The other $900 he spends as he sees fit.

You could say he's not harming her directly, and it's true there are no bruises, but that situation is greatly constraining that wife in all sorts of ways. Stress, lack of freedom, humiliation (because often her own needs will be put last and she will go without basic needs) and so on. And that sort of thing is a very, very common scenario indeed.

Compare that to a household with the same division of labour and income, but where husband and wife sit down and budget the whole $1000 together. There's less stress, more freedom, more dignity and respect, and so on.

Refusing to share his economic power is a form of abuse and control of his wife; sharing his economic power is a form of respect and care for his wife. The first scenario harms the wife; the second does not.

It is demeaning to state the obvious in A.
No loving husband does what you describe in B.

Why is it demeaning, when you seem to be claiming a god-like status for men, that they may set limits for their wives?

And if no loving husband ever seeks to control his wife, then he need not claim a god-given right to do so.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Gregorikos
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,217
19,065
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,505,465.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
There is clearly little interest in discussing such an important issue.
It seems the cause is much more important than kind sensibilities that might give rise to better understanding..

Oh, there's lots of interest in the issue. But little interest in buying into harmful approaches.

What do you want from us, Carl? You claim to want "better understanding," but you seem very quick to accuse women who disagree with you of just being "hurt" and "inappropriate."

Did you expect us to read your posts and become suddenly convinced that we should shut up in church and prostrate ourselves at our husband's feet?
 
Upvote 0

bekkilyn

Contemplative Christian
Site Supporter
Apr 27, 2017
7,612
8,475
USA
✟677,608.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Others
"I get how it can be news to some of you that people are victimized by systems legitimated by your nation, countrymen, and god. But I’m black and female and southern. I call that Tuesday."---Tressie McMillan Cottom
 
Upvote 0

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
God places limits on man and it does not harm.

God puts limits on all humans, not just man.

You put limits on women's service to God and none on men.

Humans imposing limits on other humans is called oppression.
 
Upvote 0

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
This is nonsense - most husbands are physically stronger than their wives. The wives are not harmed by this unless there is abuse. In most cases they benefit from the protection it gives them.

That's a false analogy. If I had a male room mate or business partner with greater physical strength than I have, that would not restrict my personal agency, such as your beliefs do to women.
 
Upvote 0

PloverWing

Episcopalian
May 5, 2012
4,396
5,090
New Jersey
✟335,679.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
First off, thanks so much for being willing to explore these issues.

You and I have some deep disagreements about how we view the similarities and differences and relationships between the sexes, but I think it's useful at least to explain our viewpoints to each other. For some of the points, we're just going to have to agree to disagree, but I'll respond to a couple of specifics.

I am not sure why we are reluctant to see that the sexes are created differently in a physical, emotional and spiritual sense.

"Physical", "emotional", and "spiritual" shouldn't be lumped together.

Physical: Yes, statistically men tend to be taller and stronger than women; and, of course, men's and women's reproductive systems are different. I'll agree to all that.

Emotional: This is complicated, because boys and girls tend to get different socialization. Many boys are socialized to suppress their emotions (except for anger). Many girls are socialized to care for the emotional needs of others, and also to hold themselves back in various ways. This ends up affecting emotional expressions and experiences in adulthood. There may also be innate biological emotional differences (statistically), but at our current state of knowledge, it's hard to sort out what is socialization and what is innate.

Spiritual: Nope, I don't see differences here. You didn't list "intellectual", but, for completeness, I don't see differences there either. Differences between individuals, yes. Differences between men as a group and women as a group, no.

Why do we see hierarchy and love to be two alternatives when there is plenty of scripture teaching loving leadership?

Because that is my experience of it. I never quite trust a leader, even a wise and benevolent leader, the way I trust a partner. The fact that the other person has power over me is always there, lurking in the room.

I agree if the characteristics are just incidental.

Fishermen of souls - yes.
Tax collectors - maybe not.
Men - yes
Palestinians - surely not...

This is one where we'll have to agree to disagree. I see their maleness as being as incidental as their nationality or their hair color.

Frankly I think that the modern church has departed from the scriptural structure and elevate the pastoral role to more of a teacher/manager rather than a shepherd/father.

I've moved this to the end, because I think it's a really interesting comment, quite apart from anything to do with gender. Would you be willing to elaborate on your thoughts here? Tell me how you view a teacher, and a manager, and a shepherd, and a father.

I see teaching, because it's usually the pastor who preaches the sermons, and who has more seminary training than most of the congregation. I see management as an unfortunate part of having to keep an organization and a building going -- sometimes the nuts and bolts of making sure the heat is on and the kids' classrooms have enough crayons land on the pastor's desk. Shepherd: sorry, I'm from the city; I think I've never seen an actual shepherd. :) Father: an interesting (and classic) metaphor.

All that is to say: You have some specific ideas in mind when you use these metaphors to describe pastors. What roles or approaches or activities do you think pastors should be doing more of, and what should they be doing less of, in your view? When you say a pastor should be more like a father and less like a teacher, what do you mean by that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0

jimmyjimmy

Pardoned Rebel
Site Supporter
Jan 2, 2015
11,556
5,728
USA
✟234,973.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Unlike Ploverwing most responses are designed to dishonour.
There is clearly little interest in discussing such an important issue.
It seems the cause is much more important than kind sensibilities that might give rise to better understanding..

You didn't imagine "Liberals" being so illiberal, did you?
 
Upvote 0

Carl Emerson

Well-Known Member
Dec 18, 2017
14,733
10,038
78
Auckland
✟379,929.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You and I have some deep disagreements about how we view the similarities and differences and relationships between the sexes, but I think it's useful at least to explain our viewpoints to each other. For some of the points, we're just going to have to agree to disagree, but I'll respond to a couple of specifics.



"Physical", "emotional", and "spiritual" shouldn't be lumped together.

Physical: Yes, statistically men tend to be taller and stronger than women; and, of course, men's and women's reproductive systems are different. I'll agree to all that.

Emotional: This is complicated, because boys and girls tend to get different socialization. Many boys are socialized to suppress their emotions (except for anger). Many girls are socialized to care for the emotional needs of others, and also to hold themselves back in various ways. This ends up affecting emotional expressions and experiences in adulthood. There may also be innate biological emotional differences (statistically), but at our current state of knowledge, it's hard to sort out what is socialization and what is innate.

Spiritual: Nope, I don't see differences here. You didn't list "intellectual", but, for completeness, I don't see differences there either. Differences between individuals, yes. Differences between men as a group and women as a group, no.



Because that is my experience of it. I never quite trust a leader, even a wise and benevolent leader, the way I trust a partner. The fact that the other person has power over me is always there, lurking in the room.



This is one where we'll have to agree to disagree. I see their maleness as being as incidental as their nationality or their hair color.



I've moved this to the end, because I think it's a really interesting comment, quite apart from anything to do with gender. Would you be willing to elaborate on your thoughts here? Tell me how you view a teacher, and a manager, and a shepherd, and a father.

I see teaching, because it's usually the pastor who preaches the sermons, and who has more seminary training than most of the congregation. I see management as an unfortunate part of having to keep an organization and a building going -- sometimes the nuts and bolts of making sure the heat is on and the kids' classrooms have enough crayons land on the pastor's desk. Shepherd: sorry, I'm from the city; I think I've never seen an actual shepherd. :) Father: an interesting (and classic) metaphor.

All that is to say: You have some specific ideas in mind when you use these metaphors to describe pastors. What roles or approaches or activities do you think pastors should be doing more of, and what should they be doing less of, in your view? When you say a pastor should be more like a father and less like a teacher, what do you mean by that?

The matter you raise in your final three paragraphs would be a good topic for another thread.
 
Upvote 0

Loversofjesus_2018

Well-Known Member
Nov 13, 2018
653
198
33
West coast
✟32,008.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Ok, so, you don't know.

What then? If you don't know, and don't want to come to a conclusion, must women be excluded from leadership at home and in the church indefinitely?

Or can those of us who are certain go ahead with living our lives despite your uncertainty?



Nobody is saying that a person who is unsure may not say so. Of course they may.

But not everyone is unsure. I'm very confident in my position. I don't need to back away from that confidence because not everyone shares it.
Oh I make decisions all the time I just don’t claim to be certain about things I don’t know... I would like to ask you an honest question. Is it at all possible that you could be wrong in what you are so confident about? Your claim of certainty is a little mind boggling to me because I’m not sure how you could come to this? I already says I choose to treat people equally. I don’t treat women as any less than men. But scripture at best says two different things on this matter. Yes, we can make some assumptions about what we believe Jesus would say abs what we think Paul meant. And they may be some really good assumptions but to call that certainty seems disingenuous. It’s 100% ok for anybody to try and understand scripture as best they can. But there is a problem when we claim to know something for sure if we do not. I personally love when people know things for sure because that means they can easily help me know for sure so I can understand truth. So if in fact you truly do know this for sure I would appreciate you pointing me into the direction where I am also know for sure. But if you don’t know for sure and your just going with what you think makes most sense that is 100% fine just be willing to say it’s what you think and not what you know. It seems so simple to me... If you believe scripture or truth either you believe what it says or you don’t. If a person has to start putting all types of things together to come to a because they don’t think a scripture works for them they should at least be willing to say it’s their opinion. Beating your slave doesn’t sit well with me but that’s how I feel. Do I get to say God wasn't ok with slavery according to scripture because I find slavery offensive? Of course not. I don’t get to say what another person wrote down isn’t what they meant. People today don’t get to decide the meaning of anything that came before us. We either know for sure or we simply say we aren’t sure but this is what i am gonna go with because I think it works better for everyone. That’s sincere and it’s honest. Thanks. If I’m wrong and you actually know for sure I will gladly admit I’m wrong for the opportunity to know for sure.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,217
19,065
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,505,465.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Is it at all possible that you could be wrong in what you are so confident about?

I guess I always have to leave room for the possibility that I'm completely insane, but the evidence would seem to suggest that this is not the case.

Your claim of certainty is a little mind boggling to me because I’m not sure how you could come to this?

For me, it comes down to my own relationship with God. God has called me to ministry. Either this is true, or (as noted above), I am quite mad. But that call was so clear, so overwhelming, and so completely life-changing that I cannot deny its reality.

And if God would call me in that way, then I can only make sense of Scripture when I read it in a way which prioritises all the passages which allow for that call to be at work in the lives of women.

Christ came that we may have life, and have it to the full. Not to the full for some and half-measures for women.

Unfortunately, I can't share that experience of vocation with you in a way that you can "know for sure" for yourself. (Although reading about other women's experiences of being called definitely opened my mind to the possibility). All I can encourage you to do is pursue your own relationship with God and your own sense of vocation with all that you have, and trust that God will meet you in the way that is right for you (just as God did for me).
 
Upvote 0

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Oh I make decisions all the time I just don’t claim to be certain about things I don’t know... I would like to ask you an honest question. Is it at all possible that you could be wrong in what you are so confident about?

What if @Paidiske is wrong? That's a good question, and we might as well ask what if you are wrong as well. This reminds me of Paschal's wager, which you may remember.

Stated simply: Whether you believe in God or not, you’re either right or wrong. Pascal’s Wager analyzes both the benefits of being correct and the consequences of being wrong about the existence of God.

Believers have little to lose if they are wrong about God, because they will simply die and be gone. But for the scoffing unbeliever to be wrong about God is unthinkably tragic. There is much to lose by one’s unbelief, according to Pascal.

So let's apply this to our debate.

If Egalitarians are wrong, there will be leaders who shouldn’t be leaders, pastors who shouldn’t be pastors, and Bible teachers who shouldn’t be teaching the Bible. In other words, things won’t be much different than they already are.

I really don’t desire to trivialize disobedience, but the fact is, if Egalitarians are making a mistake, it tends to be an honest one. So it’s not really a matter of disobedience at all, but one of error, if in fact Egalitarians are wrong. And from my perspective, I don’t see grave consequences in the error. Yes- some men may lose leadership, pastoral, or teaching positions, but one would assume that these would be the men who demonstrate a lack of giftedness in those areas.

If Complementarians are wrong, there will be people that could have been leaders, pastors, and teachers, people who had giftings and /or a calling on their life to be these things, but who were limited, prevented, or barred from reaching their God-given potential. And if that’s the case, let’s just call it what it is: The work of the devil.

Of course, no Complementarian that I know would willingly participate in the devil’s work. The point of their strong stand for proper “gender roles” in the church (and the home) is obedience to God and the Bible. I believe they mean well.

But it is the particular work of the devil to oppose leadership in the church. It is his work to discourage leaders, to raise up opposition to their ministry, to place limits on what they can accomplish for the Lord, and if at all possible to stop them from ever becoming leaders in the first place. That is exactly what Complementarian theology does to women who aspire to be leaders in the church.

In short: If you believe in Complementarian theology, you’d better be right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0

bekkilyn

Contemplative Christian
Site Supporter
Apr 27, 2017
7,612
8,475
USA
✟677,608.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Celibate
Politics
US-Others
For me, a god set up as the complimentarians propose isn't a god that I would want to worship and wouldn't be worth worshiping. Who could truly love a God so narrow, petty, and spiteful? Rather than a god created by such human standards, I believe that God is good ALL the time for ALL people, not good news for a chosen elite based on body shape (and oftentimes race as well) and bad news for everyone else. The very word "gospel" means GOOD news and the good news message was (is) for ALL the world. (John 3:16)

Any other god to me isn't God.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: quietpraiyze
Upvote 0

faroukfarouk

Fading curmudgeon
Apr 29, 2009
35,901
17,177
Canada
✟279,058.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
1 Corinthians 11:3
But I want you to understand that the head (ruler) of every man is Christ, the head (ruler) of a wife is her husband, and the head (ruler) of Christ is God.

Yet we are all one in Christ. Through Christ there is no favoritism. Jesus is the authority and is over all.

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
@eleos1954 The truth of the Lord Jesus as head is often sadly ignored.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Gregorikos

Ordinary Mystic
Dec 31, 2019
1,095
887
Louisville, Kentucky
Visit site
✟113,638.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
@eleos1954 The truth of the Lord Jesus as head is often sadly ignored.

Well brother you inserted "ruler" in there, when in fact that doesn't work for Christ and God, because they are co-equal. One is not the "ruler" of the other.

As Ambrosiaster said in the 4th century-

God is the head of Christ because he begat him; Christ is the head of the man because he created him, and the man is the head of the woman because she was taken from his side. Thus one expression has different meanings, according to the difference of person and substantive relationship. Commentary on Paul’s Epistles.

- Ambrosiaster
 
  • Like
Reactions: PloverWing
Upvote 0

faroukfarouk

Fading curmudgeon
Apr 29, 2009
35,901
17,177
Canada
✟279,058.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Well brother you inserted "ruler" in there, when in fact that doesn't work for Christ and God, because they are co-equal. One is not the "ruler" of the other.

As Ambrosiaster said in the 4th century-

God is the head of Christ because he begat him; Christ is the head of the man because he created him, and the man is the head of the woman because she was taken from his side. Thus one expression has different meanings, according to the difference of person and substantive relationship. Commentary on Paul’s Epistles.

- Ambrosiaster
Oh I agree about headship and equality being distinct aspects. I use the King James; the quote I made was from a different existing quote; I was making a general point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gregorikos
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Site Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,217
19,065
44
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,505,465.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Yes- some men may lose leadership, pastoral, or teaching positions, but one would assume that these would be the men who demonstrate a lack of giftedness in those areas.

To be honest, I don't think this really happens much (if at all). There is plenty of work to go around.
 
Upvote 0

Loversofjesus_2018

Well-Known Member
Nov 13, 2018
653
198
33
West coast
✟32,008.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
What if @Paidiske is wrong? That's a good question, and we might as well ask what if you are wrong as well. This reminds me of Paschal's wager, which you may remember.

Stated simply: Whether you believe in God or not, you’re either right or wrong. Pascal’s Wager analyzes both the benefits of being correct and the consequences of being wrong about the existence of God.

Believers have little to lose if they are wrong about God, because they will simply die and be gone. But for the scoffing unbeliever to be wrong about God is unthinkably tragic. There is much to lose by one’s unbelief, according to Pascal.

So let's apply this to our debate.

If Egalitarians are wrong, there will be leaders who shouldn’t be leaders, pastors who shouldn’t be pastors, and Bible teachers who shouldn’t be teaching the Bible. In other words, things won’t be much different than they already are.

I really don’t desire to trivialize disobedience, but the fact is, if Egalitarians are making a mistake, it tends to be an honest one. So it’s not really a matter of disobedience at all, but one of error, if in fact Egalitarians are wrong. And from my perspective, I don’t see grave consequences in the error. Yes- some men may lose leadership, pastoral, or teaching positions, but one would assume that these would be the men who demonstrate a lack of giftedness in those areas.

If Complementarians are wrong, there will be people that could have been leaders, pastors, and teachers, people who had giftings and /or a calling on their life to be these things, but who were limited, prevented, or barred from reaching their God-given potential. And if that’s the case, let’s just call it what it is: The work of the devil.

Of course, no Complementarian that I know would willingly participate in the devil’s work. The point of their strong stand for proper “gender roles” in the church (and the home) is obedience to God and the Bible. I believe they mean well.

But it is the particular work of the devil to oppose leadership in the church. It is his work to discourage leaders, to raise up opposition to their ministry, to place limits on what they can accomplish for the Lord, and if at all possible to stop them from ever becoming leaders in the first place. That is exactly what Complementarian theology does to women who aspire to be leaders in the church.

In short: If you believe in Complementarian theology, you’d better be right.
I gotta be honest with you, I don’t even know what those terms mean lol. When I don’t understand something or can’t be certain I say I don’t know abd then do what I think is best in my heart. Still possible I could be wrong but as long as I was sincere I have to be ok with that. In this specific case I just choose to treat woman and men equally. I’m not over my wife she’s not over me we are in this together. It seems best that way to me and much more loving. But according to scripture and what Paul said it’s possible I could be wrong about this. So I must be sincere enough to say so. I do the best I can but I don’t claim to be certain on something even if I think I have good reason I’m right. Thanks a lot. You both have helped me out with my understanding.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums