Neutering God for Women's Rights

ScottA

Author: Walking Like Einstein
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2011
4,305
657
✟33,847.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The whole idea of women in leadership is such a hot issue, and whenever it comes up it turns into a female-verses-male, equality contest...and it should not be so - because...it's not about us.

The whole point of God creating us in His image, male and female, has a purpose that is simply bigger than us...and He did it for His on purpose, not ours. Instead of squabbling over equality - we should be embracing our differences - differences that God considers important. So...instead of continuing to fight for gender self-importance...can we discuss just what it is that God has determined is so important as to make us different in the world...when, clearly, according to the scriptures, we are not at all different in the kingdom? And, don't we all, or shouldn't we all, want to serve God's purpose for our gender, instead of campaigning for our own worldly gender identity?

Disclaimer: Because we all have such a tough time not making this issue personal, I reserve the right to call foul when a post is pro-people and not pro-God - meaning, not pertaining to His purpose.
 
Last edited:

ScottA

Author: Walking Like Einstein
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2011
4,305
657
✟33,847.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So...starting with God creating Adam (a man), and then taking Eve (a women) out of the man...there is a distinct separation and difference between male and female. Move ahead then to the man and the women becoming one flesh (again...so to speak) in marriage, and we already have the long-term pattern and example of Christ being the bridegroom and we the bride, as we become One with Christ and with God the Father. This of course has been referred to in the scriptures as a great mystery, which is then explained as the relationship of Christ with the church. In other words: First we are separated from God (as Eve was separated from Adam), then we spend millennia being joined together and becoming one flesh to make the point, then we do the same as one body (the church) with Christ, which brings us back into relationship with God the Father.

That is God's purpose for a race of humanity divided by gender. It is a pattern, that we are suppose to - commanded to - follow.

Fast forward then to Jesus being women-friendly, Paul stating that there is no male or female in the kingdom, and the age of women's lib...and now we have a problem with not becoming emotionally over capacitated with our own place in the grand scheme of things. What's the problem? Do we need to backup and go through some more millennia, before we move on to Jesus and Paul's input? Or...is it just women's lib? ...'Cause, it seems pretty straightforward to me. I'm just trying to track with how and what God has laid out - without thinking I have a vote, or that men (or women) have rights to be defended.

Granted...men have totally taken advantage. But...seriously...are we going to now have to go through a period of affirmative action - or can we just get over it already, cut to the chase, and fall inline with God's intended purpose of showing the fallen world how things are supposed to come together in the end?

I say, we drop the prideful gender positions and let One light shine from the hill we have been placed upon. Which, of course means, we do not put our differences aside - but put them to work, as God has shown by example. Which we cannot do, if the example we show the world...is just the opposite of His example.
 
Upvote 0

tucker58

Jesus is Lord
Aug 30, 2007
785
55
✟10,231.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Neutering God for women's rights? I do not understand how women's rights neuters God. When it come to scripture women have a place and they are to stay in their place, at least relative to marriage and the home. Men are incharge and that responsibility is suppose to have some love and wisdom in play. But outside the home it is a whole different world and men and women should be equal under the law and in all things as they are under the eyes of God, but they are not. Scott, I agree that we should drop the prideful gender positions and let One light shine from the hill that we have been placed on, but the problem is that a lot of folks just are not like you or me. And lets face it, some of those folks are even Christians. Scott have you ever read "Sex and the High Command"? I forget who wrote it, but the male side of the human species became extinct because they were no longer needed for reproduction. And God was not neutered.
 
Upvote 0

ScottA

Author: Walking Like Einstein
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2011
4,305
657
✟33,847.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Neutering God for women's rights? I do not understand how women's rights neuters God. When it come to scripture women have a place and they are to stay in their place, at least relative to marriage and the home. Men are incharge and that responsibility is suppose to have some love and wisdom in play. But outside the home it is a whole different world and men and women should be equal under the law and in all things as they are under the eyes of God, but they are not. Scott, I agree that we should drop the prideful gender positions and let One light shine from the hill that we have been placed on, but the problem is that a lot of folks just are not like you or me. And lets face it, some of those folks are even Christians. Scott have you ever read "Sex and the High Command"? I forget who wrote it, but the male side of the human species became extinct because they were no longer needed for reproduction. And God was not neutered.
There is no male and female in the kingdom of God, so to campaign for women's rights within the context of the church, shows a disregard for the spirit, and a higher regard for the things of the flesh.

It is not that we should not extend equality to all, because amongst us all, none is greater than the other. But more importantly, we should yield to God whom made us different for a reason - these differences, we should not fight, but embrace, for, it is the will of God.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tucker58
Upvote 0

Circle Christ

TrueLuv: Jesus died-4-U Knowing you may not care
Feb 25, 2016
681
296
Missionary
✟2,411.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Neutering God for women's rights? I do not understand how women's rights neuters God. When it come to scripture women have a place and they are to stay in their place, at least relative to marriage and the home. Men are incharge and that responsibility is suppose to have some love and wisdom in play. But outside the home it is a whole different world and men and women should be equal under the law and in all things as they are under the eyes of God, but they are not. Scott, I agree that we should drop the prideful gender positions and let One light shine from the hill that we have been placed on, but the problem is that a lot of folks just are not like you or me. And lets face it, some of those folks are even Christians. Scott have you ever read "Sex and the High Command"? I forget who wrote it, but the male side of the human species became extinct because they were no longer needed for reproduction. And God was not neutered.

I've seen very few women that will say women should know their place when it comes to scripture. Whereas the number of men who think that are plentiful.

It was a woman that was the first to find Jesus' tomb was empty. Women were prophetesses in the Bible. Old and new covenants.
God is a spirit. He made all people male or female in the image and likeness of that spirit. God breathed into the nostrils of man , the Adamu, and it was then that Adam became a living soul. That does not mean Eve was not one too.

God's male identity is attributed to the politic and societal mores of the time. Patriarchal rule in government and in the household. Therefore, the God of what was formerly a polytheistic community, the Jews, became a male too.
God isn't neutered because women are made equal by laws that govern secular society. Women are already equal to men in that we are all created in the image and likeness of the one spirit that we call God.

It is our ego's and pride that see God as male. And by that illusion believe the greater population of our world, female, are less than because of it.
 
Upvote 0

ScottA

Author: Walking Like Einstein
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2011
4,305
657
✟33,847.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
God's male identity is attributed to the politic and societal mores of the time.
That is the tail wagging the dog.

No...you have it backwards: The mores of the time is attributed to God's male identity.

God came first, still does. But does that mean that women are not loved, or that they are less than? Less than men? No. Less than God? - Seriously? - Both are...and that...is the reason that gender exists at all.
 
Upvote 0

Imagican

old dude
Jan 14, 2006
3,027
428
63
Orlando, Florida
✟45,021.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I've seen very few women that will say women should know their place when it comes to scripture. Whereas the number of men who think that are plentiful.

It was a woman that was the first to find Jesus' tomb was empty. Women were prophetesses in the Bible. Old and new covenants.
God is a spirit. He made all people male or female in the image and likeness of that spirit. God breathed into the nostrils of man , the Adamu, and it was then that Adam became a living soul. That does not mean Eve was not one too.

God's male identity is attributed to the politic and societal mores of the time. Patriarchal rule in government and in the household. Therefore, the God of what was formerly a polytheistic community, the Jews, became a male too.
God isn't neutered because women are made equal by laws that govern secular society. Women are already equal to men in that we are all created in the image and likeness of the one spirit that we call God.

It is our ego's and pride that see God as male. And by that illusion believe the greater population of our world, female, are less than because of it.

Wow. Are these words really in alliance with the Bible?

The Bible says that God made Adam in His image. It states that Eve was formed from a 'part of that image': Adam. I have never read where women were created in the 'image of God'.

Maybe I'm missing something but my Bible says: "Let us create 'man' in our image". Then it says that God created both male and female. But I missed the part where it says 'let us create man and woman in our image'.

The idea that God is male came about through customs created by 'men'? Hmmm............... I would say that the concept and beliefs came from God Himself, not men 'making up' a male identity for: "The Father". Politics has nothing to do with the 'true church' or those that worshiped previously in 'the temple'. God's laws as delivered to Moses weren't politics or political. They were simply 'God's Laws as delivered by Moses'.

Unless, of course, one insists that Moses 'made up' God's Laws to suit himself.

I believe that it is these exact notions that brought about the 'idea' for such a thread as this one. Ideas that it's 'ok' to ignore what God has offered in favor of 'self'. Pretending that men and women are 'equal' so far as 'church authority'. The Bible clearly instructs us that this is not so for those that are 'true followers of His Word'. That those that profess to be followers 'must be true followers' in order to 'be' true followers. You cannot be a 'follower' without 'following'.

And that words with being a 'believer' as well. It's one thing to 'speak' about what one believes. But we are told that 'faith without works is dead'. That means that our 'fruit' will reflect what we 'truly believe'. And if our 'fruit' reflects that we are not 'following as instructed', then there is something 'wrong' with our 'true beliefs'.

Blessings,

MEC
 
  • Like
Reactions: jimmyjimmy
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
27,913
7,993
NW England
✟1,053,319.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Disclaimer: Because we all have such a tough time not making this issue personal, I reserve the right to call foul when a post is pro-people and not pro-God - meaning, not pertaining to His purpose.

I'm pro God. I'm very pro God.

I am God's child; he has created and saved me; he has given me his Spirit and gifts to serve him. Creation, salvation, the church and the kingdom are all his; his idea. I am God's child, serving God in his church, bringing Good News to his world and helping to further his kingdom. God can call who he wants to serve him, and put them in any position he chooses. God can, and does, equip those he wants to serve him.

He has called me to be a lay preacher; this is from him. This is his purpose for me and the church affirms this.
It was not my idea. I do it because he has called me to do it, not because I have any misguided ideas about "women's rights" or "being equal with men". Both men and women have the right to be who God has made them to be and do what he has called them to do.

But I have a feeling that you might still call "foul" because I do not agree with your interpretation of Scripture. In other words; "I am starting this thread; you need to agree with me or I'll report you/put you on ignore."
Why start a debate on an admittedly controversial subject - that has been debated dozens of times before - if you're not willing to consider other arguments/testimonies?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cimorene
Upvote 0

Circle Christ

TrueLuv: Jesus died-4-U Knowing you may not care
Feb 25, 2016
681
296
Missionary
✟2,411.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Wow. Are these words really in alliance with the Bible?
Yes, they are. Are yours? Do you have scripture that supports your statements?
I do .
John 4:24
Luke 24:39
Jesus was flesh and blood and yet the son of man and the son of God. Do you know anything about the culture of the time in which Jesus was born. It was patriarchal. All things from the male in the family. The male, the father or the husband, was the authority in the family. Genesis 27:1-29, Genesis 48:13-14.
Jesus was the son of God. Therefore, in Jewish tradition God would be the Father. 1 Corinthians 15:22 .
This is also why when Eve was the first one to succumb to the Devil and eat of the fruit of the forbidden tree, the sin passed to the human race through Adam who ate of it after her. All things passed through the authority of the male. Even then when God's first laws were set in the garden of Eden as thou shalt not. Eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Romans 5:12.

The Bible tells us that God is also the word. John 1:1,14 And Jesus was God in flesh. Colossians 2:9 Do you propose neutering Jesus? To fulfill the query in the OP concerning God and women's rights?


Only humans could conceive of a question like that in the OP. A new road to achieve what? A sideways implication that women are not equal? Or empowered? Or entitled to be pastors? What is the purpose of the OP when imagining neutering of God for women's rights?

That in my view is the real question here. The Bible is very clear about what God's attributes are. And that is that there is nothing, no thing, to neuter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tucker58
Upvote 0

tucker58

Jesus is Lord
Aug 30, 2007
785
55
✟10,231.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I've seen very few women that will say women should know their place when it comes to scripture. Whereas the number of men who think that are plentiful.

It was a woman that was the first to find Jesus' tomb was empty. Women were prophetesses in the Bible. Old and new covenants.
God is a spirit. He made all people male or female in the image and likeness of that spirit. God breathed into the nostrils of man , the Adamu, and it was then that Adam became a living soul. That does not mean Eve was not one too.

God's male identity is attributed to the politic and societal mores of the time. Patriarchal rule in government and in the household. Therefore, the God of what was formerly a polytheistic community, the Jews, became a male too.
God isn't neutered because women are made equal by laws that govern secular society. Women are already equal to men in that we are all created in the image and likeness of the one spirit that we call God.

It is our ego's and pride that see God as male. And by that illusion believe the greater population of our world, female, are less than because of it.

Well lets take a look something, "Yep" we are in the Christian Controversial Theology forum :) . The Hebrew were polytheistic until Moses, after Moses there was only one God. The God of Abraham was El and He was the Father of the Heavenly family. The God that Moses met on the mount was YHWH and after that incounter Moses declared YHVH the only God to be worshipped. "Let us create man in our image." Mankind does not mean men only. "Man" is the species that we belong to as human beings.

Circle Christ, you are not exactly wrong with what you have posted in this topic :) . But the problem is that, you are up against scripture. And as a Nicene Christian, one believes that the Holy Bible is the word of God in a total sense. Of course, what the word of God actually says in a total sense is constantly being argued. Whatever happened before today that may or may not have affected the out come of what is now considered the word of God by Nicene Christians does not matter if one is a Nicene Christian. And scripture does indicate that wives should obey their husbands and that man came first with woman being an after thought that was created to be a helper to man. Otherwise God created man twice. The first time man and woman in the image of God/Us and the second time because He needed somebody to take care of the garden that He had created to keep the plants and animals of the field in. A garden that needed to be irrigated because the rest of the planet was watered by dew/mist. And from this garden caretaker and the helper that was created from his rib the Hebrew are closely decended from through Noah and Abraham with God the Creator being their God.

But if you are a Nicene Christan the above is not believed so therefore can not be true. Circle Christ you are up against the word of God as understood by the Nicene Christians and that the word of God does not support what your post has presented. But we are in Controversial Christian Theology where non Nicene ideas/concepts can be discussed and those that believe in non Nicene ideas/concepts can be out reached to.
 
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

Circle Christ

TrueLuv: Jesus died-4-U Knowing you may not care
Feb 25, 2016
681
296
Missionary
✟2,411.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Well lets take a look something, "Yep" we are in the Christian Controversial Theology forum :) . The Hebrew were polytheistic until Moses, after Moses there was only one God. The God of Abraham was El and He was the Father of the Heavenly family. The God that Moses met on the mount was YHWH and after that incounter Moses declared YHVH the only God to be worshipped. "Let us create man in our image." Mankind does not mean men only. "Man" is the species that we belong to as human beings.

Circle Christ, you are not exactly wrong with what you have posted in this topic :) . But the problem is that, you are up against scripture. And as a Nicene Christian, one believes that the Holy Bible is the word of God in a total sense. Of course, what the word of God actually says in a total sense is constantly being argued. Whatever happened before today that may or may not have affected the out come of what is now considered the word of God by Nicene Christians does not matter if one is a Nicene Christian. And scripture does indicate that wives should obey their husbands and that man came first with woman being an after thought that was created to be a helper to man. Otherwise God created man twice. The first time man and woman in the image of God/Us and the second time because He needed somebody to take care of the garden that He had created to keep the plants and animals of the field in. A garden that needed to be irrigated because the rest of the planet was watered by dew/mist. And from this garden caretaker and the helper that was created from his rib the Hebrew are closely decended from through Noah and Abraham with God the Creator being their God.

But if you are a Nicene Christan the above is not believed so therefore can not be true. Circle Christ you are up against the word of God as understood by the Nicene Christians and that the word of God does not support what your post has presented. But we are in Controversial Christian Theology where non Nicene ideas/concepts can be discussed and those that believe in non Nicene ideas/concepts can be out reached to.

I'm a Jesus Christ Christian. I don't know any Christian that puts Nicea before Christ. Therefore the outreach if there is any needed should be toward those who call themselves Nicene Christians. Likely so because they have little understanding of Nicea's place in history.

However, that's not what is being discussed here. And apparently from what you're trying to say, you believe women are lesser beings to men. Sexism by definition is one sex, typically male, having authority and control over the opposite sex; women.
When God is a spirit and without gender, one sex is not then superior to the other under the authority of a sexless God.

The passages in God's word prove that a male god is a man made concept contrary to the new covenant Jesus brought to the world. And that the male god image set by the Hebrews was a cultural one due to the earthly Patriarchy they had in place.

Jesus came to save all people in the world not just males. John 3:16 says about Salvation and to whom it is offered, whosoever.... It does not state, for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son that any male who believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life.

Women and men wept for Jesus at the altar he died upon to save the whole world. The cross. There was no divide between the sexes there. All were one in the eyes of Christ. Because he came to save all people. Not, as the Jewish tradition he was born into, would have warranted had he followed that, his dying to save the men of the world so that they could lead the women in their lives to him.

Galatians 3:26-28. We are all one in Jesus Christ. There is no free person, no slave, no Greek, no Jew, no Arab, no difference in who Jesus died for and whom are loved by God eternally.
John 1:29. Jesus was the Lamb who took away the sins of the world. Not the man's world. The world.
A woman was the one who found Jesus' tomb empty. Women were prophetesses in the Bible. What we'd call pastors today. Women walked with the Disciples and Jesus in his ministry. Jesus took the woman whom he saved from stoning with him into his company when he preached his truth to those who would receive him.

Jesus preached against religion. Against sexism. And now over 2000 years later those who follow his spirit argue sexism is a factor?And that scripture backs it up?

No.
But to each their own. Those who believe sexism is the right path to take following the spirit that gave itself to the world in the form of a person whom we could see and relate to, who died after suffering unimaginable torture in order to write a new covenant with his blood, and save the world from their sins if they only believed in him, believe now that sexism, which is what is the heart of what is argued here by some men, is holy? Is righteous? Is of God? Is of Jesus and his ministry?
Jesus died to save the world and reiterate the sexism that existed in the Hebrew culture in his day?

And to state that in a new manner, in a new thread, the inroad is asking if people have neutered God? in the name of women's rights? And what is argued against scripture that say absolutely not, is a mindset that says it must be, yes! Instead.


385087.jpg
I clearly can't reason with that. Proof is in the writing of retorts that argue against scripture and reason in order to promote the notion that God is a Chauvinist.
I can't argue with the intention that seeks to reiterate God has been neutered so that women could feel equal to men in all things because that and according to Jesus' own example when women traveled with his Disciples, which would not happen in his time due to that cultural gender divide, because those type teachings by men are unholy.

I'll step out now and pray for those who continue their pursuit of arguing to persuade Christian's the OP answer must be, yes. Even though Jesus never said it was. In fact, he died to prove it was not true. And change the culture of the time in the process when that is what was intended to free all people from their sins.

:prayer: Matthew 7

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tucker58
Upvote 0

ScottA

Author: Walking Like Einstein
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2011
4,305
657
✟33,847.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm pro God. I'm very pro God.

I am God's child; he has created and saved me; he has given me his Spirit and gifts to serve him. Creation, salvation, the church and the kingdom are all his; his idea. I am God's child, serving God in his church, bringing Good News to his world and helping to further his kingdom. God can call who he wants to serve him, and put them in any position he chooses. God can, and does, equip those he wants to serve him.

He has called me to be a lay preacher; this is from him. This is his purpose for me and the church affirms this.
It was not my idea. I do it because he has called me to do it, not because I have any misguided ideas about "women's rights" or "being equal with men". Both men and women have the right to be who God has made them to be and do what he has called them to do.

But I have a feeling that you might still call "foul" because I do not agree with your interpretation of Scripture. In other words; "I am starting this thread; you need to agree with me or I'll report you/put you on ignore."
Why start a debate on an admittedly controversial subject - that has been debated dozens of times before - if you're not willing to consider other arguments/testimonies?
I am not speaking in my own defense or my own opinion or my on interpretation. And there is no need for interpretation of God being male or of the standard that He has established for His own purpose.

Are there exceptions to God's male/female standard? Of course...but they are the exception not the rule.

Nonetheless, all things are lawful, but all things are not helpful. 1 Corinthians 6:12
 
Upvote 0

Imagican

old dude
Jan 14, 2006
3,027
428
63
Orlando, Florida
✟45,021.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Yes, they are. Are yours? Do you have scripture that supports your statements?
I do .
John 4:24
Luke 24:39
Jesus was flesh and blood and yet the son of man and the son of God. Do you know anything about the culture of the time in which Jesus was born. It was patriarchal. All things from the male in the family. The male, the father or the husband, was the authority in the family. Genesis 27:1-29, Genesis 48:13-14.
Jesus was the son of God. Therefore, in Jewish tradition God would be the Father. 1 Corinthians 15:22 .
This is also why when Eve was the first one to succumb to the Devil and eat of the fruit of the forbidden tree, the sin passed to the human race through Adam who ate of it after her. All things passed through the authority of the male. Even then when God's first laws were set in the garden of Eden as thou shalt not. Eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Romans 5:12.

The Bible tells us that God is also the word. John 1:1,14 And Jesus was God in flesh. Colossians 2:9 Do you propose neutering Jesus? To fulfill the query in the OP concerning God and women's rights?


Only humans could conceive of a question like that in the OP. A new road to achieve what? A sideways implication that women are not equal? Or empowered? Or entitled to be pastors? What is the purpose of the OP when imagining neutering of God for women's rights?

That in my view is the real question here. The Bible is very clear about what God's attributes are. And that is that there is nothing, no thing, to neuter.

You merely using the word 'rights' shows me that your 'opinion' is based more on a secular basis than what we are offered in the Bible. Rights aren't mentioned in the Bible.

Women are not 'equal' to men in any 'way, shape or form'. To infer such is to ignore the 'obvious differences' between women and men. If you 'don't' know or understand the differences, well, I'll leave it up to someone else to explain them to you.

Women, according to the Bible, are not entitled to be 'church leaders' in any capacity. Not one mention of women being 'entitled'.

But there IS scripture that 'states' that women cannot be pastors or 'church leaders'. Unless you believe that a 'woman' can be the husband of one wife, it is perfectly clearly offered what a 'bishop MUST be'.

And Paul's offering more than once that women are to remain 'silent' in the 'church' pretty much makes it 'impossible' for a woman to be a 'church leader' according to God's Word. And you 'do not' have any scripture that offers any other conclusion for it does not exist. You see, I have 'read' the Bible and what you say exists does not.

1 Corinthians 14:34
Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

1 Timothy 2:11-15 (KJV)
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

These scripture have already been quoted on the topic over and over. You either accept it or deny it. Interpretation is not necessary for the words couldn't be offered any more clearly. Most KNOW what they mean and simply accept it as offered. Some insist that they 'aren't really the truth' and then come up with some of the most inane examples, of 'why' they aren't the truth, imaginable. But when one compares inane examples to the 'truth', it becomes apparent rather quickly that 'wishful thinking' is not really the 'truth' now is it?

Now, I have 'shown' you scripture that when taken 'as offered' makes it perfectly clear that women 'cannot' be 'church leaders'. If they are to remain 'silent in the church' then how do you suppose they are going to function as 'church leaders'?

Now, you show US scripture that states that women 'can' be 'church leaders'. Scripture. Funny, but no matter how hard you try, it is an impossible task for no such scripture exists.

And by speaking as you have spoken, you have damaged your credibility to the point that I doubt that there is much or anything you have to offer that I can accept. We are to shun 'false prophets' and that is exactly what you are modeling yourself to be.

Blessings,

MEC

Blessings,

MEC
 
Upvote 0

Imagican

old dude
Jan 14, 2006
3,027
428
63
Orlando, Florida
✟45,021.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I am not speaking in my own defense or my own opinion or my on interpretation. And there is no need for interpretation of God being male or of the standard that He has established for His own purpose.

Are there exceptions to God's male/female standard? Of course...but they are the exception not the rule.

Nonetheless, all things are lawful, but all things are not helpful. 1 Corinthians 6:12

Scott,

I believe you probably already 'know' as well as myself: you cannot discuss issues of 'church leadership' or 'homosexuality' with those that are opposed to such views. For they have already chosen a path contrary to the truth contained within the Bible.

Romans plainly and clearly explains that homosexuality is a 'state' in which men or women have basically 'turned their backs on God'.

And the 'women pastor thing'? Nothing other than that same 'spirit of Eve' that led to her disobedience in the garden. Once a woman decides that she has been granted 'equal rights' by God, it is impossible to even discuss such matters as authority in the 'church' with them. They either won't or 'cannot' listen any longer.

Blessings,

MEC
 
Upvote 0

ScottA

Author: Walking Like Einstein
Site Supporter
Feb 24, 2011
4,305
657
✟33,847.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Scott,

I believe you probably already 'know' as well as myself: you cannot discuss issues of 'church leadership' or 'homosexuality' with those that are opposed to such views. For they have already chosen a path contrary to the truth contained within the Bible.

Romans plainly and clearly explains that homosexuality is a 'state' in which men or women have basically 'turned their backs on God'.

And the 'women pastor thing'? Nothing other than that same 'spirit of Eve' that led to her disobedience in the garden. Once a woman decides that she has been granted 'equal rights' by God, it is impossible to even discuss such matters as authority in the 'church' with them. They either won't or 'cannot' listen any longer.

Blessings,

MEC
Thanks, that is very clearly stated. It would be nice if we actually could talk about it - Lord knows we have a need to. :(
 
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

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
27,913
7,993
NW England
✟1,053,319.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I am not speaking in my own defense or my own opinion or my on interpretation.

If you're saying that 1 Timothy 2:12 proves that women cannot be in leadership; that the words that Paul wrote to that church 2000 years ago are God's command for his church today, then yes, that is your interpretation.

Like I said, do you take the Bible literally in all other matters - men having short hair, for example; women not wearing gold in church? How do you reconcile God's, apparent, command for women to be silent, with his instructions about how women should prophesy?

And there is no need for interpretation of God being male or of the standard that He has established for His own purpose.

God is Spirit; neither male nor female.
He is a personal God who wants a personal relationship with us; he is not an "it", so we need to say "him" or "her". All the prophets and Jesus referred to God as "he" and as Father. That doesn't mean he is male, as we define maleness - Scripture speaks of him giving birth, bringing to new life, and tells of his compassion, nurture, loving kindness and so on.

The phrase "standard that he has established for his own purpose", no doubt refers to your firm belief that Paul's words to that church amount to a command from God; an unbreakable, unshakeable order that has to be obeyed for all time. Because you are so certain that this is so, then obviously you are not going to believe anyone who says that God has called them to lead a church - their experience contradicts your belief, so clearly it is they who are at fault/mistaken.

Are there exceptions to God's male/female standard? Of course...

Really? You are saying that God has commanded that no woman should lead worship, or a local congregation - but that sometimes he goes against his own command?
So how can we trust a God who apparently contradicts himself?
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
27,913
7,993
NW England
✟1,053,319.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Scott,

I believe you probably already 'know' as well as myself: you cannot discuss issues of 'church leadership' or 'homosexuality' with those that are opposed to such views. For they have already chosen a path contrary to the truth contained within the Bible.

Not allowing women to lead worship is not a "truth contained within the Bible" - not when it clearly talks about Miriam singing and dancing before the Lord, Huldah and Deborah prophesying, Deborah leading the whole nation, and women of the NT being deacons, prophets, leading prayer and so on.

Romans plainly and clearly explains that homosexuality is a 'state' in which men or women have basically 'turned their backs on God'.

We're not talking about homosexuality.

Scott,
And the 'women pastor thing'? Nothing other than that same 'spirit of Eve' that led to her disobedience in the garden. Once a woman decides that she has been granted 'equal rights' by God, it is impossible to even discuss such matters as authority in the 'church' with them. They either won't or 'cannot' listen any longer.

That is nonsense - patronising nonsense.
It also sounds like a clear example of pride - "my interpretation of Scripture is correct, and they, who don't listen, are rebellious, disobedient and only concerned with women's rights."

Tell me, if the Lord says to you one day, "these women are my children, my servants and are doing what I called them to do. Why have you belittled, insulted and tried to stop them?" How would you answer him?
 
Upvote 0

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
27,913
7,993
NW England
✟1,053,319.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks, that is very clearly stated. It would be nice if we actually could talk about it - Lord knows we have a need to. :(

Some of us have been trying to talk about, and discuss sensibly, the verses in question. But when our words are dismissed as "explaining away the Scriptures" or "twisting/changing them to make them fit your beliefs and give you an excuse to do what you want" - it's a little difficult. Not to mention, frustrating.
 
Upvote 0

squirrel123

Active Member
Sep 9, 2015
276
354
44
✟43,176.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Married
Maybe I'm missing something but my Bible says: "Let us create 'man' in our image". Then it says that God created both male and female. But I missed the part where it says 'let us create man and woman in our image'.
Here you go -
Genesis 1:27:
So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

(Emphasis mine, obviously)

(Edit to add - I see the default translation here, uses "man", instead of "mankind", as is often done in the bible. The fact that man and mankind is often used interchangeably, doesn't mean that it suddenly doesn't include women.

I have to say this - being told that I am not created in the image of God, is one of the most offensive things I've ever heard from another Christian.
 
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

Strong in Him

Great is thy faithfulness
Site Supporter
Mar 4, 2005
27,913
7,993
NW England
✟1,053,319.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I have to say this - being told that I am not created in the image of God, is one of the most offensive things I've ever heard from another Christian.

Absolutely.
After all, if you quoted a verse which said that men are sinners, no one would argue that means women are perfect and don't need a Saviour.
 
Upvote 0