It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Shonet1430
This is about wisdom though and is being personified as a woman.
Originally posted by Shonet1430
Of course!!! It because of our "binah"...intuition, intelligence, understanding which is also the root of "build" as women were built and not formed so we're closer to G-d's ideal!! Practice makes perfect!!!!!!
Originally posted by Shonet1430
One of the seven female prophets!!!!
Originally posted by Shonet1430
The Hebrew uses cling in lieu of united which I think fits much better. I like this verse because it shows that human males are to be different than the other males as he wants to be with his wife; also it shows that the ideal in the garden was monogamy.
Proverbs 31:10 "What a rare find is a capable wife! Her worth is far beyond that of rubies."
Originally posted by riley
I thought the bible was the word of god..?
Originally posted by riley
Are you saying this section can be dismissed?
Originally posted by riley
Marriage vows used to require the woman to say 'obey' and I think the man was meant to say cherish or protect [I can't remember which].. why was not the man required to obey?
Originally posted by riley
Your comparison is flawed. The attitudes towards women were layed out in the OT.. not by the NT.
Originally posted by riley
Not equally punnished.. Eve was additionally punnished with the pain of childbirth and menstration for tempting Adam. I know we have discussed this before and you said she was actually 'blessed' but the bible clearly states otherwise.
Originally posted by riley
That is your morality- not reflective of everything in the bible [you'd be one conflicted person if it was] as you obviously do not agree with Paul..
Originally posted by riley
he obviously thought women should be seen and not heared.
Originally posted by riley
Now many throughout history have interprited this same quote in the negative- this is when the bible is used as a weapon to dominate.
Originally posted by riley
My point is you can find quotes that may support women in the bible.. but having fully read it from a woman's perspective.. the majority of quotes concerning women are negative and promote oppression.. as for wisdom being reffered to as a 'she'.. it's probably the same thing as calling a ship or tornado 'she'- usage of the term may've been just a reflection of the language used at the time [providing it was correctly translated] rather than paying homage to womankind.
Originally posted by riley
Galatians 3:28 - "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Need more? I got more.
That does not negate the mysoginist quotes.. I can find more as well- wanna be here all day and go tit for tat with bible contradictions?
Originally posted by riley
I guess what the bible says depends on which parts you want to pay attention to or ignore:
1 Corinthians 11
3 Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 6 If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head.
7 A man ought not to cover his head,
since he is the image and glory of God;
but the woman is the glory of man. 8 For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9 neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.
Seems women are less 'holier' than men in the eyes of god.
I don't know.. maybe the fact that women used to still have to say "love , honour and obey" only last century.. Saint4god.. how can you say that marriage is suppose to be 'equal' when men didn't even have to say this?
..the logic behind this was Eve being born for Adam [as in possession] ..same idea behind rape being still legal in marriage last century.. thats not 2000 years ago.
1 Timothy 2
11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission.
Can't see the misogynry yet?
12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
15 But women will be saved through childbearing--if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
nope.. that doesn't sound like a single unit.. sounds like a master/servant 'relationship' to me.. where is this equal 'unity' based on mutual respect?
Originally posted by saint4God
Some background since we're only pulling out a small section.
The laws from 1776 - 1950-ish didn't cover the Bible, nor do they sufficently do so today!
Eve was created in Eden while man was not. He was merely transplanted
Originally posted by saint4God
Originally posted by riley
I thought the bible was the word of god..?
Yeah, and?
Originally posted by riley
Are you saying this section can be dismissed?
Not at all! Are you saying what I've presented can be dismissed?
Originally posted by riley
Marriage vows used to require the woman to say 'obey' and I think the man was meant to say cherish or protect [I can't remember which].. why was not the man required to obey?
I do not know. My speciality is with God and His word, not cultural decisions.
Originally posted by riley
Your comparison is flawed. The attitudes towards women were layed out in the OT.. not by the NT.
I beg to differ per your posts. You yourself have quoted the New Testament in 2 places and are claiming Paul's letters to individual churches are the law of all mankind eternally.
They were both punished.
Separately but equally. Personally, I think having a child is a blessing. One that a man could never know.
Oh I agree that Paul made the best possible decision in his position. It's really important to understand what exactly was going on in those churches at that time. Paul has a lot of really great things to say and even find him liberating in the rights of women (he said they didn't have to get married, which at the time was the most important and expected thing in their lives according to their environment). You're right, I would be remiss to dismiss Paul.
Originally posted by riley
he obviously thought women should be seen and not heared.
Hehe, that's how he solved his problems it seems, yes.
Jesus had a much more open approach in listening and accepting women as God's creation.
I'm not responsible for those who claim to be "Christian". My responsibility extends to me and helping those wishing to be true Christians according to God.
Originally posted by riley
Galatians 3:28 - "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Need more? I got more.
That does not negate the mysoginist quotes.. I can find more as well- wanna be here all day and go tit for tat with bible contradictions?
I've already addressed yours. Would you care to address mine?
Galatians 3:28 - "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." Need more? I got more.
Originally posted by Shonet1430
14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
Right because Adam first deceived the woman. Did you forget that part?
nope.. that doesn't sound like a single unit.. sounds like a master/servant 'relationship' to me.. where is this equal 'unity' based on mutual respect?
Because you obviously have no knowledge of the Hebrew. Or maybe you want it to be that way.
Originally posted by darkelf
Riley, when you are dicussing the writings of Paul, you have to take into account the culture of the day in which he was preaching. We are talking about a patriarchial society. God was basically making the husband ,as head of the household, responsible and accountable for whatever his family did. Men decided since they were responsible and accountable that they had to control their families. It sounds very misogynistic. And it is. I don't believe that's how God meant for it to be though.
If Paul actually was a misogynist, he would not have told the husbands to love their wives as they do their ownselves (unselfishly).
Oh, by the way, please tell me that you don't believe that stay at home moms don't work.
Originally posted by riley
Ah.. so you do think women should cover or shave their heads.
Originally posted by riley
Okay then.
Isn't dismissing/rebelling against that rebelling against god's wishes?
Originally posted by riley
Whats happens when one contradicts the other? Do you just pick and choose which is convenient at the time?
Originally posted by riley
eg. I follow 'judge not lest ye be judged' [hey it's wise advice].. but there is someone else here that judges others repetitively with the 'tell the tree by the fruit' loophole.. who decides? That person is still a 'christian' because he's technically following the bible.
Originally posted by riley
I was referring to the Catholic church.. it's meant to follow 'his' word [which is was doing with those vows] and has had a huge influence on western culture and attitudes.
Originally posted by riley
OT set the trend.. [adam and eve] It continued from there. The OT is very sexist and is the foundation of the New.. when Jesus' was born it was just after God's midlife crises and he was starting to mellow out a bit.
here we go again..
Separately but equally. Personally, I think having a child is a blessing. One that a man could never know.
Supposedly.. Eve could have had the blessing of pain free childbirth without menstrating before they were punnished.. the pain and 'the curse' [ they were so ignorant in those days] were her added punnishments.. Adam's were.. working.. thing is women are not biologically exempt from working [like men are from painful procreating] so it's not really a 'seperate' and exclusive punnishment.
Originally posted by riley
Even though he banned them from teaching women, told them they should be servants etc. etc. My perception of you is changing.. can't you see how this is discriminatory?
Originally posted by riley
Solved problems?! He imposed them.. it's probably the reason 'obey' was included in vows for so long.
Originally posted by riley
As an apostle he is in fact speaking on Jesus' behalf so the apostles should by right be consitant in Jesus' message [which they aren't] .. Jesus himself did not directly feature in the bible [way past his time].
Originally posted by riley
He is a vengeful god.
He is a loving god. Which god?
Originally posted by riley
Indeed it is very inclusive and egalitarian.. problem is there is always another proverb that can void it in favour of something hostile.
Originally posted by Shonet1430
I don't know.. maybe the fact that women used to still have to say "love , honour and obey" only last century.. Saint4god.. how can you say that marriage is suppose to be 'equal' when men didn't even have to say this?
Right because Adam first deceived the woman. Did you forget that part?
Originally posted by riley
I thought the bible was the word of god..? Are you saying this section can be dismissed?
"Marriage vows used to require the woman to say 'obey' and I think the man was meant to say cherish or protect [I can't remember which].. why was not the man required to obey?
Yeah right. Try being a woman before feminism.. the church was one of it's main foes.
Your comparison is flawed. The attitudes towards women were layed out in the OT.. not by the NT.
Not equally punnished.. Eve was additionally punnished with the pain of childbirth and menstration for tempting Adam. I know we have discussed this before and you said she was actually 'blessed' but the bible clearly states otherwise.
That is your morality- not reflective of everything in the bible [you'd be one conflicted person if it was] as you obviously do not agree with Paul.. he obviously thought women should be seen and not heared. Now many throughout history have interprited this same quote in the negative- this is when the bible is used as a weapon to dominate.
My point is you can find quotes that may support women in the bible.. but having fully read it from a woman's perspective.. the majority of quotes concerning women are negative and promote oppression..
as for wisdom being reffered to as a 'she'.. it's probably the same thing as calling a ship or tornado 'she'- usage of the term may've been just a reflection of the language used at the time [providing it was correctly translated] rather than paying homage to womankind.
Originally posted by jake1997
Maybe you should get the view of those poor christian women who were forced to say that vow.
Try and pick a fight with them instead.
Originally posted by riley
So do you think this quote compliments women?
First of all 'rare' suggests the majority of women are not 'capable' [whatever that means].. and her 'worth' is weighed against currency.. it's actually quite derogitory.
Originally posted by jake1997
saint,
You are to be commended with not getting sucked into a fruitless argument by someone who is constantly taking verses out of context.
Well done.
Originally posted by saint4God
They were both punished. Separately but equally.
Personally, I think having a child is a blessing. One that a man could never know. Yes it's painful, but anything worth having is a struggle. Sorry if you still feel you got the short end of the stick, I don't know if there's anything I can say or do to change that.
Wisdom is not an object. It is not driven nor is it a disasterous weather pattern. It is sought by those who desire for truth. There's no mistake on the translation, see where it talks about a wife and other female traits in Proverbs.
Originally posted by jake1997
How does this jive with what you said about them being created at the same time?