why do you make those kind of remarks? I'm not brandishing anything.
You defended the feminist point of view and I merely noted that.
Adam was the reason the ground was cursed. Adam himself was not cursed. The toil to make a living was his punishment.
Some people believe Satan began his dirty deeds back at Pangaea when the dinosaurs began to devour one another.I have heard that interpretation. As I just pointed out, it took over a thousand years after Genesis for that to happen.
Some people believe Satan began his dirty deeds back at Pangaea when the dinosaurs began to devour one another.
I'm glad I could be of service there.Good question -- I was wondering when someone was going to ask that!
I suppose the conservative Lutherans are similar to other conservative groups in this regard. While I won't knock those who feel a 'firmer' role placement between men and women is needed, I would recommend researching the historical context that surround 1 Timothy 2 and Titus 2, especially with the writing of the late Catherine Clark Kroeger). Her book, I Suffer Not a Woman: Rethinking I Timothy 2:11-15 in Light of Ancient Evidence, could be an eye-opener for you.The LCMS, to my knowledge, doesn't really broach this. My thinking has been more informed by my readings of the conservative Reformed, who tend to get far more into gender roles and responsibilities types of discussions; the patriarchal branch of them explores challenging angles like this at times, although I'm not sure if any of them have done this one, specifically. 1 Timothy 2 and Titus 2 get thrown around a lot to put women 'in their place,' so to speak, in other contexts, however, so I was attempting to take that kind of reasoning to other Biblical threads, and see if it worked.
I'm glad I could be of service there.
I suppose the conservative Lutherans are similar to other conservative groups in this regard. While I won't knock those who feel a 'firmer' role placement between men and women is needed, I would recommend researching the historical context that surround 1 Timothy 2 and Titus 2, especially with the writing of the late Catherine Clark Kroeger). Her book, I Suffer Not a Woman: Rethinking I Timothy 2:11-15 in Light of Ancient Evidence, could be an eye-opener for you.
It might also be helpful if you research the various 'types' of Feminism, because there are several and they're not all the same. In fact, at the least, I'd say that the 1st Wave Feminism from over a hundred years ago is cogent and useful. The 2nd Wave feminism, not so much.
With all of the moderate but still substantive study I've done on this issue, I have to say that women's place in the Church (and marriage) needs to be modified in some ways, especially since the fact that with the Advent of Christ, any overtly strong Patriarchal structures should be reevaluated.
Nice come back!EDIT: I have adjusted my thesis on this a bit after further discussion and analysis of Scripture with some here. Woman was deceived, but Scripture says sin came through one man (Adam), so I no longer view sin as fully woman's responsibility. See pages 6, 7, 8 of this thread for further explanation and context.
Thanks. Yes, there are nuances in both Christian conservatism and feminism; they are hardly monolithic groups, and have many sub-groups. It can be difficult for all of us to keep this in perspective sometimes when discussing these ideas.
At any rate, in all my reading, the firmest role placements on women are done by certain circles of the Reformed, the Anabaptist groups (no surprise there as they are the most resistant to change in all spheres of life of any Christians), and the IFB. Some of these groups even overtly define themselves as 'patriarchal' (I was once online friends with one former Vision Forum adherent who, when Doug Phillips came to disgrace, said that patriarchy in and of itself must still nonetheless be defended among the Biblically faithful!).
Confessional Lutherans don't follow that ideology (I believe patriarchy has come up twice in the adult Bible classes I've attended, and both the senior and associate pastors at the LCMS church I attend don't subscribe to it), nor do they endlessly debate and try to categorize spheres of what women should or shouldn't do, as I find in Reformed discussions of "Biblical womanhood" all the time. Confessional Lutherans only believe in role restrictions for the pastoral position (LCMS) and some church office positions (WELS). Anything beyond that would seem magisterial use of reason.
There's also a thing in Lutheranism called the doctrine of vocation where both men and women can live out Christian lives in the day-to-day, whether at job, school, home, etc. This thinking isn't found in the other groups I mentioned, and some of those other groups think women working outside the home at all is a violation of certain Pauline NT passages. Such thinking is foreign to WELS or LCMS Lutherans.
Lastly, regarding feminism, you are correct in there have definitely been different waves. I've read a bit about these. The latest wave is patently absurd with unrealistic expectations of so-called 'equality' that don't take equality of opportunity into context, and which constantly denigrates men. But that's a far cry from earlier waves where women just wanted to vote, have property, and such. There are some who will argue that allowing the earlier waves inevitably led to more demands from later waves, but that's a cavernous discussion beyond what can be exegeted from Scripture, so I'll leave that one alone for now.
EDIT: I have adjusted my thesis on this a bit after further discussion and analysis of Scripture with some here. Woman was deceived, but Scripture says sin came through one man (Adam), so I no longer view sin as fully woman's responsibility. See pages 6, 7, 8 of this thread for further explanation and context.
...Ok. I apparently came in late on this development, kdm. That's good.
No problem. The thread has been mostly good discussion, and I was able to see the viewpoint of some others in light of further Scripture.
I still have questions about how firm the line needs to be drawn on gender in a more macro sense, but that's probably best served in a separate topic. This one may have run its course.
EDIT: I have adjusted my thesis on this a bit after further discussion and analysis of Scripture with some here. Woman was deceived, but Scripture says sin came through one man (Adam), so I no longer view sin as fully woman's responsibility. See pages 6, 7, 8 of this thread for further explanation and context.
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?