Is the bible sexist?

[GingerBeer]

Sexist, homophobic etc are ridiculous terms invented by the Left to control how you think.

You seem to be putting the Left's principles above the Bible, are you?

Words need not have politics but people, such as yourself, do have politics so let's work not to impose political wars on the bible.

 

[Invalidusername]

She rejected your opinions posed as facts and did so with arguments based on reason. Then you come back with what was basically a "nuh uh" which at least partially disproves your original argument about how men are more logical and women more emotional.

Tell me any "facts" she presented that was linked with a scientific study and not full of hyperbole and emotional reasoning.

 

[bekkilyn]

Tell me any "facts" she presented that was linked with a scientific study and not full of hyperbole and emotional reasoning.

Nice deflection.

 

[Paidiske]

I am coming to the idea this discussion is in vain for what glory dose it bring to Christ for what benefit dose it bring any

Here's the thing. Let me go back to a quote from St. Irenaeus of Lyons: "The glory of God is a human person fully alive."

Now... this discussion is important because it reflects on the question of how human beings can live within the fullness of life which Christ came to bring. Is it by being separated into rigid gender roles and hierarchies, or is it by living as equals and allowing each person to contribute based on their gifts, calling, personality, and so on?

My sense of this is that it is more the latter where we experience fullness of life, so learning to understand the Scriptures in ways which see God's intention in that kind of approach, do indeed bring glory to Christ and benefit to us as we muddle through life. And also make us more effective in mission, as we reach out to a world which then sees as us truly caring about them for who they are, and not attempting to impose our control on them!

 

[Invalidusername]

Nice deflection.

How so?

 

[Gregory95]

Here's the thing. Let me go back to a quote from St. Irenaeus of Lyons: "The glory of God is a human person fully alive."

Now... this discussion is important because it reflects on the question of how human beings can live within the fullness of life which Christ came to bring. Is it by being separated into rigid gender roles and hierarchies, or is it by living as equals and allowing each person to contribute based on their gifts, calling, personality, and so on?

My sense of this is that it is more the latter where we experience fullness of life, so learning to understand the Scriptures in ways which see God's intention in that kind of approach, do indeed bring glory to Christ and benefit to us as we muddle through life. And also make us more effective in mission, as we reach out to a world which then sees as us truly caring about them for who they are, and not attempting to impose our control on them!

I didn't mean to come across as I willed to control. I don't I recognize I am nothing it is Christ who is everytging. I only was speaking what I've read as my understanding and I welcome any opinion grounded in Scripture. for we all seek after the truth. I came across as thinking women as less then , but this is not how I feel !


Simply put my understanding is this man and woman are equal in spirit however as Peter points out woman is the weaker vessel ( vessel for the spirit) ie our flesh . I mean no disrespect to anyone and love all humans and a special love for my family of Christ . I never wish to hurt anyone only seek truth and if I error in anything I beg for correction that's rooted in Scripture.

I came to the idea the discussion is vain in that the Bible says what it says perhaps I misunderstood the verse in Corinthians however I was speaking on what it seemed to mean as it says BUT the woman is the glory of man however before this it said man was created in the image of God how it seems to brake down is how I came to my understanding if it didn't say BUT then I would have understood it to say as the person I was speaking with

I would prefer to stay away from this topic in the forum I would speak on it in a PM but I don't want to upset anyone else . until I could say 100% yes or no with it being rooted in Scripture I should not spout my opinion for we are here for truth not opinion

 

[Paidiske]

Gregory, you're welcome to keep discussing this with me in PM if you'd like; although I'll answer your post here so others can see it too. (It is very difficult, I think, for men to take a position that women should be in submission etc, without that coming across on some level as "will to control." What are women to conclude about how those men want to relate to us?)

I think the weakness Peter speaks of is simple physical vulnerability; women are more vulnerable, especially around pregnancy and childbirth (and remember in Peter's day many women would have died giving birth). But we're not more "fleshly" and less spiritual than men; that's... a pretty grievous slander.

 

[Rubiks]

All this complaining about interpreting the Bible through the lens of Feminism makes me wonder why doesn't anyone take this verse literally:

Matthew 5:32 (NRSV) But I say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery

Yes? No?

 

[Gregory95]

Gregory, you're welcome to keep discussing this with me in PM if you'd like; although I'll answer your post here so others can see it too. (It is very difficult, I think, for men to take a position that women should be in submission etc, without that coming across on some level as "will to control." What are women to conclude about how those men want to relate to us?)

I think the weakness Peter speaks of is simple physical vulnerability; women are more vulnerable, especially around pregnancy and childbirth (and remember in Peter's day many women would have died giving birth). But we're not more "fleshly" and less spiritual than men; that's... a pretty grievous slander.

i could see that and again am sorry for it sounding like so in no way did i mean for it to seem like that

as for your thoughts onPeter i agree woman is not less spiritual then men perhaps im not correctly explaining what im trying to say

our body is the vessel to which our spirit is in correct?

if so then wouldnt Peter just be saying the vessel of a woman is weaker then the vessel of a man i don't understand why this would be hurtful as in spirit we are equal and my understanding is this life and our flesh is nothing the spirit is what matters as it is the spirit that rests with God in heaven once we have passed on not the flesh for ALL flesh is corrupt

i have talked to Jewish leader to Jews he would be called rabbi and he explained it like this

the woman is prone to be more emotional where as the man is prone to be more look at the facts

he said this is why women should not lead in normal circumstances seeing as when the time comes for a judgment call it is more likely the women would side with feelings and the man with facts

keep in mind this is what he said not me as i wish to offend no one it just seemed to me to line up with why Paul said the things he did

i look forward to your response sister i hope i spoke better this time

 

[~Zao~]

I’m sorry if I offended you but it’s tiresome to repeat things year after year and never having it be heard because that teaching is not pleasing to the ears of those who have their minds set already. If it was accepted by any it certainly hasn’t flowed thru to others for fear of what I don’t know. But the buck always seem to stop there and whatever truth may lay therein is left there to rot.

But here it is again as to what Peter taught according to the Greek of 1 Peter 3:1-6

After singling out slaves and exhorting them to be submissive to their masters and patiently endure unjust punishment Peter then moved on to Christian wives who had unsaved husbands. Wives that were seeking to win husbands to the Lord Jesus. They were going about it the wrong way and Peter corrected them in that. Which would mean equality was the norm when both were believers. Those husbands were not people who would listen to reason on hearing the gospel so the best sermon was preached by example. "That even if they obey not the word they may without a word be won" They weren't men who didn't know the gospel. Incompatabilty in religion didn't justify dissolution of marraige so subjection would be a means which God could use to win unbelievers to His way.

The pious living being promoted didn't depend on outer adornment to effect the change like before they were saved so as not to appeal to their husband's depraved nature. Kosmos - adornment - is the opposite of chaos. Her adornment was to be in keeping with her Christian status. One that was fitting and not diverse from one's character. Proceeding from the heart. So as to confront the husband not with the world but with the Savior. i.e.: Not feeding his sin nature but appealing to the conscience. Iow from the inner spiritual being. Romans 12:2

No one can serve 2 masters. The term lord referred to near relatives, father, mother etc while John uses the same Greek word to refer to the 'elect lady' in his epistle. "As long as the believing wives are doing good, they need not be afraid with any sudden terror of the account which their unbelieving husbands may exact from them"

 

[Paidiske]

our body is the vessel to which our spirit is in correct?

if so then wouldnt Peter just be saying the vessel of a woman is weaker then the vessel of a man i don't understand why this would be hurtful as in spirit we are equal and my understanding is this life and our flesh is nothing the spirit is what matters as it is the spirit that rests with God in heaven once we have passed on not the flesh for ALL flesh is corrupt

i have talked to Jewish leader to Jews he would be called rabbi and he explained it like this

the woman is prone to be more emotional where as the man is prone to be more look at the facts

he said this is why women should not lead in normal circumstances seeing as when the time comes for a judgment call it is more likely the women would side with feelings and the man with facts

I could agree that, looked at from a particular perspective, women's bodies could be seen as weaker than men's bodies (although I don't agree that that's the only perspective one could take).

But when that then goes on to claims of women being more emotional and men being more rational,

a) I disagree that that is in any way factual. Both men and women have different personalities in that regard.
b) I disagree with any such argument being used to keep women out of leadership, since the evidence is that women are no less capable in leadership roles than men are.
c) I disagree that this has to do with the weakness or strength of our bodies, since we are talking about our minds, intellects and personalities.

 

[Gregory95]

I could agree that, looked at from a particular perspective, women's bodies could be seen as weaker than men's bodies (although I don't agree that that's the only perspective one could take).

But when that then goes on to claims of women being more emotional and men being more rational,

a) I disagree that that is in any way factual. Both men and women have different personalities in that regard.
b) I disagree with any such argument being used to keep women out of leadership, since the evidence is that women are no less capable in leadership roles than men are.
c) I disagree that this has to do with the weakness or strength of our bodies, since we are talking about our minds, intellects and personalities.

this is somthing i will continue to seek God about

i agree with a

as for b i think of this and dont know how to justify b with this being in the Bible am i misunderstanding? i mean no disrespect

I Timothy 2:9-15

 

[Paidiske]

Okay, so the question with that passage is "Why did Paul write it? Was it to address a particular problem in that congregation, or was it to give an instruction for every church in all time?"

Note that the first part of that instruction is "Let a woman learn..." which in itself was profoundly counter-cultural for the day.

 

[Gregory95]

Okay, so the question with that passage is "Why did Paul write it? Was it to address a particular problem in that congregation, or was it to give an instruction for every church in all time?"

Note that the first part of that instruction is "Let a woman learn..." which in itself was profoundly counter-cultural for the day.

how would one go about discerning whether it is meant for that certain church or as a whole?

noted and agreed with woman is not to be put in the dark but to learn the good news as well

 

[Paidiske]

how would one go about discerning whether it is meant for that certain church or as a whole?

noted and agreed with woman is not to be put in the dark but to learn the good news as well

Well, let's note that elsewhere, Paul commends Phoebe, a deacon, and Junia, an apostle. Would he do that if his prohibition on women holding authority was absolute?

The point about being allowed to learn is that you cannot teach until you have learned. But when you have learned, you might become an able teacher...

 

[Gregory95]

Well, let's note that elsewhere, Paul commends Phoebe, a deacon, and Junia, an apostle. Would he do that if his prohibition on women holding authority was absolute?

The point about being allowed to learn is that you cannot teach until you have learned. But when you have learned, you might become an able teacher...

3 New Testament Female Leaders: Phoebe, Junia, Prisca - The Junia Project

very interesting and provoking

now to discern did Paul do this because they were the only ones fit for the role as he seen no men with their level of faith and what he wrote in Tim is the overall but with the exception of when there is no men to rise to the call

or

did he do this because it is all well for women to lead and what he wrote Tim for that certain church

do you have more insight on this my sister as this particular thing i have not studied into i just took the verses at what they said

thank you for your patience with me i truly appreciate it

 

[Paidiske]

now to discern did Paul do this because they were the only ones fit for the role as he seen no men with their level of faith and what he wrote in Tim is the overall but with the exception of when there is no men to rise to the call

or

did he do this because it is all well for women to lead and what he wrote Tim for that certain church

Well, Scripture doesn't address this directly, I think.

But indirectly we see Paul talk about all believers receiving spiritual gifts, and all believers being part of the royal priesthood, and all believers being called to participate in the life and mission of the Church... so I am not seeing much reason there to limit that to men, or only to allow women to step up when there are no fit men.

Personally, I would say if God calls women to a role, then why God calls us is not really the point; our duty is to obey, both individually and the Church as a whole. But certainly, there is more than enough work to go around for all men and women who are willing, in carrying out the Church's mission!

 

[Gregory95]

Well, Scripture doesn't address this directly, I think.

But indirectly we see Paul talk about all believers receiving spiritual gifts, and all believers being part of the royal priesthood, and all believers being called to participate in the life and mission of the Church... so I am not seeing much reason there to limit that to men, or only to allow women to step up when there are no fit men.

Personally, I would say if God calls women to a role, then why God calls us is not really the point; our duty is to obey, both individually and the Church as a whole. But certainly, there is more than enough work to go around for all men and women who are willing, in carrying out the Church's mission!

well i must say i truly am happy for you speaking with me as now i have much better understanding

now as i study i will seek this answer out as well thank you very much!

to be closer to the truth then i was before warms my heart!

i now believe a woman may be called i still must seek out the general rule as to understand why Paul said those two different things in Romans and Tim

 

[Sparagmos]

Okay first it litteraly says that in the Bible so
Do you believe the Bible?

Second if people would STUDY.they would SEE in SPIRIT we are EQUAL woman is only the weaker VESSEL

Third put down your pride in your flesh God HATES pride

Fourth STUDY

May the Holy Spirit guide us and not the will of the flesh

I’ll refer you to Padiske’s post #174 above. She said it well.

 

[Giacinta]

Words need not have politics but people, such as yourself, do have politics so let's work not to impose political wars on the bible.

I didn't impose political wars on the Bible, I'm not talking about politics, just saying how you are following the world's way of thinking rather than Christian way of thinking.