Baptist views on feminism

[MrJG]

I honestly can't believe you all have been going on and on about this with Ringo...seriously...this thread is just long winded at this point and honestly Ringo has not a leg to stand on(no offense brother but you don't!)
Fundamentals of it all 1
Progressive(at least) viewpoint 0.

thanks.

I respectfully disagree with you brother, because this is not a fundamentalist vs progressive debate, it is a Biblical truth vs secular viewpoint debate.

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

Ok bible 1, society 0.

Peace.

 

[MrJG]

Ok bible 1, society 0.

Peace.

HaHa, I like that brother

Aren't God and His Word always "one up" on man and society.

 

[Ringo84]

I'll respond to the above posts in the order in which they came.

If we're done patting ourselves on the back for "winning one for the Bible" (I wasn't aware this was a contest), we can return to our discussion.

Ringo...

You didn't answer from the previous post... Are you married?

What Matthew said.

Ringo is arguing the secular viewpoint of feminism over the Bible.

Are we going to discuss the issue here or Ringo84?

When have I once mentioned feminism apart from responding to someone else?

Ringo, you offer no Biblical proof as to why you believe this way, you just say "this is the way it is, so this is the way it is." You offer no argument or reason as to why you say this.

I have never said "I think this is the way it is, so that's the way it is". I have argued for my point of view. And I think I have brought up some good points.

It is easy to argue in circles my friend. Every argument that anyone offers up, whether Biblical or practical, you shoot down because you do not believe things to be that way.

Because they aren't that way. Women aren't "weaker vessels". Women aren't solely responsible for the events in the Garden. Submission and accountability does not flow one way in a marriage.

From your secular point of view they are equal.

That word 'secular' keeps getting thrown around in this thread like the buzz-word 'Socialism' is thrown around on the political board. A viewpoint that doesn't agree with yours is not necessarily "secular".

"There is no male nor female...for all are one under Christ Jesus" - Galatians 3:28. God apparently does find women equal to men.

. It is not strange for the verse to specify only women to submit. That is what it means!

I know what it means, but the verse flies in the face of simple fact: that mutual submission - accountability - comes from the man and the woman in a marriage.

Your point of view is appearing to try to change scripture.

No. My point of view is trying to understand a verse that seems illogical.

Not exactly... all characteristics of a man/woman relationship are not complementary. Using an academic analogy... What if both my wife and I are good at mathematics... and neither one of us is any good at English. If one of us must pass English or we both fail... From your point of view... who takes the lead to make sure we pass? If, as you say, we were absolutely complementary in strengths... one of us would be good at math and one good at English.

I can understand why y'all are fighting so hard against my questions about submission, but I'm at a loss to understand why complementary strength seems to be such a hard point to grasp.

Women are stronger in certain areas than men. Men are stronger in certain areas than women. The genders complement each other. They go hand in hand. What is so difficult to understand about that?

Actually, you contradict youself when you say men and women have complementary strengths. You have acknowledged "strength"... therefore one gender IS "stronger" or "weaker" than the other (implying a complementary situation). It just depends on the specific characteristic.

I don't necessarily think that one gender is stronger than the other. I think they complement each other's strengths and weaknesses.

In general, head-to-head competition... based solely on physical strength men are stronger.

In upper body strength.

Pregnancy and labor??? Men have not been blessed with the ability have children. There is no comparison. You're grasping at straws.

Are men's bodies strong enough to bear a child?

If you'd read my quote closely... I said "in general". For the most part it is true men tend to be more logical and women tend to be more nurturing and driven by emotion.
Anyway... what if I am making an assumption about all women and men? You are making an all out assumption that men and women are totally equal... I assure you my young neophyte... that absolutely is not the case.

OK...so what makes you think they aren't equal?

This is not in dispute. The only thing that has to be answered is who is to take a leadership role. Both the man and woman can't lead... I guarantee you that most successful Christian marriages are lead by the man.

If there isn't one leader(the man) in the household... it's kind of like a conversation between Sponge Bob and Patrick that goes something like this....
Patrick: What do you want to do today?
Sponge Bob: I don't know, what do you wanna do?
Patrick: I don't know, what do you wanna do?
Sponge Bob: I don't know, what do you wanna do?
Patrick: I don't know, what do you wanna do?
Sponge Bob: I don't know, what do you wanna do?
.

One or the other can take authority when the time comes for it. The leader does not necessarily have to be the man.

I have tried to tell Ringo this before only to have him deny that he is denying scripture because he is not denying it.

I have never once "denied" Scripture. Raising questions about a particular verse is not "denial".

Once again: are we going to discuss Ringo84 or the subject at hand?

I have also tried to tell him that you cannot compare the strengths of men and women in the area of pregnancy because men are not physically able to be pregnant. Not that men couldn't handle it, just that men were not designed by God with that ability.

They weren't designed with that ability because men's bodies couldn't handle it. And thus, women are stronger than men in that area.

honestly Ringo has not a leg to stand on(no offense brother but you don't!)

Good. I love a challenge.

Ok bible 1, society 0.

I see why this is such an important issue for you all. You think that you have to "defend" God and "defend" the Bible, as if God needs to be defended.

God must be pretty weak indeed if He needs to be defended from a twenty-five year old discussing a relatively minor issue on an online forum.
Ringo

 

[MrJG]

I'll respond to the above posts in the order in which they came.

If we're done patting ourselves on the back for "winning one for the Bible" (I wasn't aware this was a contest), we can return to our discussion.

Hahahahaha, that made me lol.

Originally Posted by bloodwashed

Ringo is arguing the secular viewpoint of feminism over the Bible.
​

Are we going to discuss the issue here or Ringo84?

When have I once mentioned feminism apart from responding to someone else?

The ideas that you spout of no hierarchy in marriage are feminist ideas.

Ringo, you offer no Biblical proof as to why you believe this way, you just say "this is the way it is, so this is the way it is." You offer no argument or reason as to why you say this.
​

I have never said "I think this is the way it is, so that's the way it is". I have argued for my point of view. And I think I have brought up some good points.

I did not mean that you literally said what I put in quotes, I was just adding emphasis. The points that you have brought up are circular arguments that prove nothing. The only one convinced by your arguments is yourself. You do say it but in different words. See underlined text below.

It is easy to argue in circles my friend. Every argument that anyone offers up, whether Biblical or practical, you shoot down because you do not believe things to be that way.
​

Because they aren't that way. Women aren't "weaker vessels". Women aren't solely responsible for the events in the Garden. Submission and accountability does not flow one way in a marriage.

You offer NO proof as to why this supposedly is this way. You just say women aren't the weaker vessel (contradicting scripture), but you offer no valid proof to prove this save in your own mind (i.e. pregnancy argument).

Originally Posted by becareful

From your secular point of view they are equal.
​

That word 'secular' keeps getting thrown around in this thread like the buzz-word 'Socialism' is thrown around on the political board. A viewpoint that doesn't agree with yours is not necessarily "secular".

That is because you are spouting secular opinions (feminist ideals). And as for the "socialist" comment, "if it walks like a duck..."

"There is no male nor female...for all are one under Christ Jesus" - Galatians 3:28. God apparently does find women equal to men.

This is in the matter of salvation, that is why earlier in the verse he says "there is neither Jew nor Greek..." Apparently, God does distinguish men and women in the matter of marriage, because in Ephesians and elsewhere in the Bible, He provides the duties of each to the other, never saying that they are equal in marriage with no authority figure over the other.

. It is not strange for the verse to specify only women to submit. That is what it means!
​

I know what it means, but the verse flies in the face of simple fact: that mutual submission - accountability - comes from the man and the woman in a marriage.

Have you ever stopped to think that maybe we as humans don't always follow God's plan in marriage?There is mutual submission, but there is also submission by the wife to the authority of the husband.

Your point of view is appearing to try to change scripture.
​

No. My point of view is trying to understand a verse that seems illogical.


Women are stronger in certain areas than men. Men are stronger in certain areas than women. The genders complement each other. They go hand in hand. What is so difficult to understand about that?

Actually, you contradict youself when you say men and women have complementary strengths. You have acknowledged "strength"... therefore one gender IS "stronger" or "weaker" than the other (implying a complementary situation). It just depends on the specific characteristic.
​

I don't necessarily think that one gender is stronger than the other. I think they complement each other's strengths and weaknesses.

In general, head-to-head competition... based solely on physical strength men are stronger.
​

In upper body strength.

Pregnancy and labor??? Men have not been blessed with the ability have children. There is no comparison. You're grasping at straws.
​

Are men's bodies strong enough to bear a child?

How do you know if they are not? To say they can't be strong enough because of the simple fact they can't have children is nonsensical. We don't know if men's bodies are strong enough to have children because God did not design us for that purpose.


Originally Posted by bloodwashed

I have tried to tell Ringo this before only to have him deny that he is denying scripture because he is not denying it.
​

I have never once "denied" Scripture. Raising questions about a particular verse is not "denial".

Above, you plainly deny that women are the weaker vessel, even though that is what the Bible says!

Once again: are we going to discuss Ringo84 or the subject at hand?

I have also tried to tell him that you cannot compare the strengths of men and women in the area of pregnancy because men are not physically able to be pregnant. Not that men couldn't handle it, just that men were not designed by God with that ability.
​

They weren't designed with that ability because men's bodies couldn't handle it. And thus, women are stronger than men in that area.

How do you know men's bodies couldn't handle it?! HOW!?!

Originally Posted by NoRapture

honestly Ringo has not a leg to stand on(no offense brother but you don't!)
​

Good. I love a challenge.

HAhahaha, you are spunky if nothing else.

Ok bible 1, society 0.
​

I see why this is such an important issue for you all. You think that you have to "defend" God and "defend" the Bible, as if God needs to be defended.

I do not think God needs to be defended, I am trying to do this for your benefit, because it appears that your understanding of this subject is somewhat unclear. I was just joking around with NoRapture. This is not about "who wins."

God must be pretty weak indeed if He needs to be defended from a twenty-five year old discussing a relatively minor issue on an online forum.

So then, does this mean you feel like you are arguing against the Bible and thus we have to defend it?

Ringo

.

 

[Ringo84]

The ideas that you spout of no hierarchy in marriage are feminist ideas.

You seem more intent on slapping labels on the ideas I have provided than actually proving them wrong.

I did not mean that you literally said what I put in quotes, I was just adding emphasis. The points that you have brought up are circular arguments that prove nothing. The only one convinced by your arguments is yourself. You do say it but in different words. See underlined text below.

Show me that my arguments are circular.

That is because you are spouting secular opinions (feminist ideals).

More label slapping.

He provides the duties of each to the other, never saying that they are equal in marriage with no authority figure over the other.

They are in authority to one another, as all relationships require mutual submission.

You offer NO proof as to why this supposedly is this way. You just say women aren't the weaker vessel (contradicting scripture), but you offer no valid proof to prove this save in your own mind (i.e. pregnancy argument).

Is there any argument that you would accept? I've already shown that since women's bodies can withstand holding a baby for nine months that they are, in fact, as strong as men. The fact that women are taking over jobs that were once dominated by men seems to prove my contention that women aren't "weaker vessels", but any proof I produce is shouted down as "secular" and "feminist" or dismissed as "not good enough".

Have you ever stopped to think that maybe we as humans don't always follow God's plan in marriage?There is mutual submission, but there is also submission by the wife to the authority of the husband.

Both the man and the woman are accountable to one another. There is no one-way street with accountability.

How do you know if they are not? To say they can't be strong enough because of the simple fact they can't have children is nonsensical. We don't know if men's bodies are strong enough to have children because God did not design us for that purpose.

Of course we know that men's bodies can't handle having babies! Men's bodies don't have the same engineering in certain areas to withstand the weight of an unborn child. Women trump men in that regard.

Above, you plainly deny that women are the weaker vessel, even though that is what the Bible says!

Well, I may "contradict" scripture to say that slaves aren't beholden to their masters or that the earth literally has four corners. That doesn't necessarily mean that I'm wrong.

How do you know men's bodies couldn't handle it?! HOW!?!

Common sense.

HAhahaha, you are spunky if nothing else.

Thank you.

I do not think God needs to be defended, I am trying to do this for your benefit, because it appears that your understanding of this subject is somewhat unclear.

My understanding is unclear?

So then, does this mean you feel like you are arguing against the Bible and thus we have to defend it?

No. This means that God is thick-skinned enough to endure someone questioning a verse in the Bible on an online forum.

Incidentally, I appreciate the fact that you don't feel the need to "defend" God. That's a positive.
Ringo

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

You guys have fun. LOL
I never realized that secular feminism could be defended within 23 pages of a thread here at CF...keep it going...I'm calling Guiness Book.

 

[Ringo84]

When you're ready to discuss this issue without slapping labels onto my beliefs, I'll be here.
Ringo

 

[leothelioness]

double post

 

[leothelioness]

I think, to save us any confusion, we need to clarify what we mean by "equal". Do we mean equal in terms of human worth or do we mean it in terms of our roles as set out by God?

I agree that we are equal in the former, but in the latter we are different.

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

When you're ready to discuss this issue without slapping labels onto my beliefs, I'll be here.
Ringo

I call it like I see it...it's been 23 pages of the same thing from you on this subject.

The barebones Gospel is a scandal....in that we see the Glory of God!!!

--- Paul Washer.

Meaning: it goes against all secular reasoning!!!!

Peace brother.

 

[Ringo84]

That's a good point, though I would argue that men and women's roles are not that different. Women and men both can preach and women and men both are mutually submissive in marriage.
Ringo

 

[Ringo84]

I call it like I see it...it's been 23 pages of the same thing from you on this subject.

And it's been twenty-three pages of the same from you, mlgurgw and all the others.

"Women must submit"
"Why?"
"Because the Bible says so"
"Why does the Bible say that when both partners submit?"
"Because women are weaker"
"But women aren't weaker"
"Yes they are"
"How so?"
"Because the Bible says so"
etc etc
Ringo

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

Because the bible says so is the way it goes my brother.
We aren't talking about obscure eschatological doctrine...we are talking about a literal statement from a literal God.
I won't apologize to anyone for having that attitude.

 

[leothelioness]

That's a good point, though I would argue that men and women's roles are not that different. Women and men both can preach and women and men both are mutually submissive in marriage.
Ringo

Well, our roles are different in the sense that men are to lead, guide, protect and provide for their families and women are to care for and tend to children and hold down the home front while the husband is away doing what it takes to keep the family alive.

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

Women can preach all they want...I see good preaching from Beth Moore for sure...but as the PASTOR OF A CHURCH...it's not in the Word.

Thanks for listening.

 

[Ringo84]

Because the bible says so is the way it goes my brother.
We aren't talking about obscure eschatological doctrine...we are talking about a literal statement from a literal God.
I won't apologize to anyone for having that attitude.

Simply answering "because God said so" when someone has a valid question is like answering "Goddidit" when valid questions are asked about creation. It evades the question and substitutes pat answers for real thought.

Women can preach all they want...I see good preaching from Beth Moore for sure...but as the PASTOR OF A CHURCH...it's not in the Word.

As a matter of fact, it is. Phoebe the deaconess was a minister during Biblical times and had many of the same functions as male clergy.

Well, our roles are different in the sense that men are to lead, guide, protect and provide for their families and women are to care for and tend to children and hold down the home front while the husband is away doing what it takes to keep the family alive.

Women can't lead? Women can't protect and provide for their families?
Ringo

 

[leothelioness]

Women can preach all they want...I see good preaching from Beth Moore for sure...but as the PASTOR OF A CHURCH...it's not in the Word.

Thanks for listening.

Was that in response to me? Are you saying I'm "preaching"?

 

[LiturgyInDMinor]

Was that in response to me? Are you saying I'm "preaching"?

Oh NO NO NO..sorry it's in response to the general message that Ringo is trying to convey.

I have a habit of responding to a thread and not quoting what I'm responding too...sorry.

 

[leothelioness]

Women can't lead? Women can't protect and provide for their families?
Ringo

Yes, they can. My grandmother did it, and quite successfully. My point was that that's not our primary role.