Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Please quote or reference ANY post in ANY thread on ANY forum that says that women are sub-human, etc ... (as a basis for your "please note")
I've read maybe hundreds, and didn't see anything like you mentioned. That's why I asked - for verification/ integrity of purpose.Just read any thread that includes women in the topic.
This is all fair, Paidiske. Maybe I was making a distinction that was inappropriate. I think you're right.I'm really sorry about your experience, archer.
I don't know? I can't speak for that exact circumstance, but I know there have been plenty of occasions in my life where I've been acutely aware that I wouldn't have been treated as badly if I were a man. I don't think it's wrong to notice or articulate that.
I mean, there are times when someone treating you badly makes it explicit and clear that it's about gender ("Women don't belong in science" (my first degree was in science), or "It's not appropriate for a young woman to do this job," or "It isn't the right time now to add a female in [role].") There are other times when people don't explicitly state that it's about gender, but you know that a man in that position wouldn't be treated in the same way, or face the same criticisms for the same behaviour. Pointing that out can be a valid part of analysing what is being done wrong, actually.
Have you since then ever seen Biblical (right) 'anger' taught ?I was talking with my wife earlier. She has expressed some frustration with me for not being more “assertive,” and said it made for some economic hard times when the kids were young. I asked her if her Sunday school ever taught the “JOY = Jesus, Others, then You.” She said it was mentioned once or twice but never developed or even repeated. In my congregation it was drilled home with a “Jesus, 2 billion OTHERS, and then yourself.” So any anger was taught as trying to put self ahead of someone else.
“Be angry but sin not” never made sense in that context. It always seemed to be missing a leading DON’T.
If I got it that bad as a guy, I can only imagine how much worse the girls got it.
They could get angry since they are God and God does not have human fallen flesh to be sinfully angry.Even studying specifically in the Bible when Jesus and Yahweh were angry - seeing WHO and WHAT they were angry at, what the Bible says about this ?
short fast note: this is both sin, and harmful to one's own self, and to others, especially if in the body of Christ this happens.The only way I could possibly see that happening is if it is so bottled up inside that no one, not even those closest to you, can tell you are angry.
I can understand the “harmful to self,” if one believes psychology, which most of evangelicalism does NOT; but you will have to show me chapter and verse SPECIFICALLY saying it is sinful for me to believe that.short fast note: this is both sin, and harmful to one's own self, and to others, especially if in the body of Christ this happens.
I didn't even think of that possibility, that it is sin for you to believe something.....I can understand the “harmful to self,” if one believes psychology, which most of evangelicalism does NOT; but you will have to show me chapter and verse SPECIFICALLY saying it is sinful for me to believe that.
I was thinking about that! Yes, we learned that acronym in Sunday School. There was a song:I asked her if her Sunday school ever taught the “JOY = Jesus, Others, then You.”
That was replaced by. “Love one another as I have loved you.” (after all, how good is “love your neighbor as yourself” when you are suicidal??)"Love your neighbor as yourself" is an important message:
I can understand the “harmful to self,” if one believes psychology, which most of evangelicalism does NOT; but you will have to show me chapter and verse SPECIFICALLY saying it is sinful for me to believe that.
I took as meaning to express anger, but I wanted him to clarify.That it is sinful for you to harm yourself, or that it is sinful not to express anger?
Tell me, Dave, if your emotions are buttoned down so tightly that nobody except you even knows that you're feeling them... is that honest? Does it help your relationships if you never communicate deeply about how things make you feel?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?