Women need to shut up and sit down

reply to post by LDragonFire


You are essentially getting this misogynistic viewpoint from the "Apostle" Paul. He indeed came off as one. This is a writer of many books in the New Testament who formulated Christianity and all of its rules. No wonder I never could stand him!

He, IMO was a con-man and a closet homosexual that was into self-mutilation (being around young Timothy and heaven only knows how many other young boys). A Chicken hawk! It is no surprise that a major part of the Bible was biased against women. Do I hear Satan calling?

Yet, not so in the Old Testament. There were women prophets and counselors to the kings.

"Express your feelings...Matrix!" Lol!

Originally posted by mystiq
Female empowerment is a hoax?

no, more like a cruel joke that we can see the results of in the little 13 year old hoochie mommas that are walking around willingly objectifying themselves bc that is what society is teaching them about female empowerment.

Originally posted by AshleyD
But let's say you have a Christian wife who is married to an unbeliever. She can either divorce him or go to her pastor who will step in.

My husband never did the things mentioned above or anything near it but when he was doing things I resented, my pastor would come over and talk to him. This absolutely does not mean men can do anything to their wives and the wives must put up with it.

So how exactly the pastor "steps in" in the case of the "unbeliever" husband, lol ?

It is obvious to me that some people are not fully "capable" of resolving their marriage issues and have no problem with "people of faith" snooping into their relationship. I always wondered how that feels ?

Any man that puts himself above a woman must feel insecure in some way. I would never follow a religion that condones this kind of behavior where a woman must sit down and shut up. Pfffft!

Just more evidence showing how out-dated the Bible is. We need a new religion/mythology.

Originally posted by mystiq
This anti-woman propaganda aint going anywhere. Take it off planet please.

that's what *I* am saying!! men have their roles and duties to this earth and women have their roles and duties as well. anything outside those roles is a danger to the future of this planet and i am scared too

just bc we MAY BE able to cross over and pursue SOME of what the other does doesn't necessarily mean we *should*.

unless it is done to promote the well being of those around you (like a woman taking a part time job to help w/ the immediate expenses of her family or other exceptions), it is selfish and against everything we were designed to do in our gender roles as human beings.

having the freedom to do anything doesn't mean you should act on that freedom to do anything. w/ freedom comes responsibility and women today have proven that maybe we don't deserve some of these freedoms. (yeah, i know, that will upset some ppl, but maybe instead of getting offended, think about the other side of the coin and try to understand where i coming from first........ then you can get offended by me calling you out of your selfish pursuits so long as you will call it what it is)

ppl IN general seem to be seeking selfish and meaningless illusions in their lives just bc they can and this is a scary thing to be passing down to the next generations.

they are learning from us that neglecting ppl (neglecting the bonds we have w/ them, their overall wellbeing including spiritually menatally and physically, and our obligation to this world as a whole) for personal selfish pursuits just for $$, recognition, and/or power is perfectly acceptable and not only acceptable but a must if you want to be considered "worth" anything.

the true heroes in our society are not ppl like obama, mccain, einstein, maya angelou, martin luther king jr, clinton (either/or), jfk, ben stein, marilynn monroa, britney spears, jennifer anniston, ashley simpson etc etc... (although these are the heroes we are feeding our children)

the heroes are those parents who are making the sacrifice of personal gain in order to teach their children (THEMSELVES) the value of this world and its inhabitants. the parents that don't spoil their children w/ rooms stacked full of toys and video games galore. the parents that work together (yes, the father working outside the home for the physical needs and the mother working inside the home for the emotional and spirtual needs).


the father that teaches his son through example how to gently, but effectively guide and protect the family through life w/ love and compassion for each member of his family. the mother who teaches her daughter where her FEMININE POWER TRULY CAN BE FOUND by supporting her husband, sharing her wisdom w/ him in a humble, respectful manner, tending to the needs (not wants) of the children w/ loving hands and a patient disposition. THIS IS THE TYPE OF WOMAN who should be lifted to the top of the "be like her" list for our daughters, but this type of woman won't ever seek to be at the top of any list because her pride rests solely in her family and her strength is her humble wisdom through self sacrifice for the betterment of those in her charge.


the parents that don't try to change the world through the world, but rather try to change the world through the future generations that have been placed in their immediate care aka.... their children (trainees if you will lol) the mother who not only understand their place, but don't resent their place as humble housewives and mothers therefore teaching their daughters not to resent their femaleness are the real heroes in this world and they are where are hope lies.

do we have enough heroes to counteract those who are suffering from the disease of self though, i wonder

[edit on 19-7-2008 by justamomma]

So who here hasn't had a body in either sex, anytakers?

NOT LIKELY.

Originally posted by Night Star
Any man that puts himself above a woman must feel insecure in some way.

and most of them are insecure bc they are having to compete w/ females now. women are just as insecure though or they would not resent what we were designed to do thus challenging men in their roles.



[edit on 19-7-2008 by justamomma]

[edit on 19-7-2008 by justamomma]

reply to post by MatrixProphet

You are essentially getting this misogynistic viewpoint from the "Apostle" Paul. He indeed came off as one. This is a writer of many books in the New Testament who formulated Christianity and all of its rules. No wonder I never could stand him!

I believe some of his teachings have been misunderstood,mistranslated or deliberetly manipulated.


Paul,at one point traveled with a woman called Thecla,she was an apostle who was martyred.She taught men and women alike and helped spread the word of Jesus.The Acts of Paul & Thecla is part of the NT apocrypha and can be found by following the link below.
www.fordham.edu...


There is also evidence that women were ordained into the Catholic Church.
352 AD,at the Council of Laodicea it is decreed that women should no longer be ordained.A decree which was ignored because sometime in the 14th century Bishop Pelagio complained that women were still being ordained and were still hearing confessions.Pope St.Gelasius in 494 AD wrote a letter to areas such as Lucania,Bruttium and Sicilia telling them to uphold the decree of the Council of Laodicea.

In Romans 16:7 Junia is called an apostle by Paul.

1 Corinthians 11:5 says that every woman who prays or prophesying should have her head covered.It was obviously common for women to be prophets and prophesying can be a form of teaching.Female prophets are also mentioned in other verses such as Luke 2:36.Isaiah 8:3.Joel 2:28.Acts 21:9.

St Jerome in his letters and writings mentions female teachers.The most common was Marcella,a woman highly admired by Jerome and many others.At her home in Rome (4th century) she taught men and women.

Some women,such as Melanie the Elder,set up monasteries in places like Palestine and taught the local population.

Acts 18:26 talks of a woman Priscilla (with her husband) teaching a Jew named Apollos.

There is also archaeological evidence for women functioning as Deacons, Presbyters and Bishops in the early Christian churches. There are tombstone inscriptions, frescos and mosaics in Rome and elsewhere that name or picture a woman and list her religious title of authority.

For example, in Rome at the Church of St. Praxida, inside the Chapel of St. Zeno, an inscription on a mosaic(possibly 5th. Cent.) denotes the figure on the mosaic as the “Episcopa Theodora” Bishop Theodora. The inscription has been changed and the “Ra” part of her name removed to give the religious title a male name, but a veiled woman is pictured in the mosaic. There are also tombstone inscriptions in Rome, where the women listed on the stones are described as “Honorable Bishops.” Many more examples of this type of evidence is in the books;Fore-Mothers:Women of the Bible by Janice Nunnally-Cox; Women in the Church: a Biblical Theology of Women in Ministry,by Stanley J. Grenz and The Lady Was a Bishop by Joan Morris.

Council of Orange(A.D.441)-Canon 26.

“Let no one proceed to the ordination of Deaconesses anymore."

Council of Epaon(A.D.517)-Canon 21.

“We abrogate completely in the entire Kingdom the consecration of widows who are named Deaconesses.”

Council of Orleans(A.D.533)

“No longer shall the blessing of women deaconesses be given, because of the weakness of their sex.”

451 Council of Chalcedon Canon nr. 15 of the Council states:

No woman under 40 years of age is to be ordained a deacon, and then only after close scrutiny."

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that women played a large part in early Christianity,one only has to look.






[edit on 19-7-2008 by jakyll]

Originally posted by 5thElement


So how exactly the pastor "steps in" in the case of the "unbeliever" husband, lol ?

It is obvious to me that some people are not fully "capable" of resolving their marriage issues and have no problem with "people of faith" snooping into their relationship. I always wondered how that feels ?

they will sit down and pray with the wife, that God will speak to the heart of the husband, and change his ways...and he will beat her no longer.
but then, or course, when it comes to angry terrorists threatening their country, it's more like....drop the danged bombs!! attack the countries....kill the innocent children! no praying for God to do much of anything to their hearts!!

reply to post by dawnstar


The teaching of getting a non-member to convert because they are married to a member or are about to be married to one also goes against the Bible.

1 Corinthians 7:13-14.

13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not,and if he be pleased to dwell with her,let her not leave him.14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife,and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband:else were your children unclean;but now are they holy.

[edit on 19-7-2008 by jakyll]

reply to post by justamomma

first off....
jesus said that his sheep will hear his voice, and obey only him!!!! not thier husbands, not the priests, not the kings and lord. that is the heavenly order of power. any power that can be, has been, and is used to prevent the sheep from following his voice is a worldly power. it was paul, and maybe a couple other disciples that eventually reestablished those worldly powers as being "heavenly"

look, most of the women are working because they want their kids to have a decent home, they want them to be well fed, they want them to have healthcare, they want them to be able to go to college. heck, maybe they even might some healthcare for themselves! I'm sorry if our desires for our gets to have some of the very same things that our tax money is probably being used to give your kids has so negatively affected you that now you feel pressured to have to work...
that is such a shame!
half of my kid's life we couldn't afford their healthcare, a decent place for them to live, we had maybe $30 dollars a week to feed them with. finally, my husband finally relented and let me get a job, he had no choice really, it was either that or go without some we really needed. then I worked also, things might have been alittle better, but well, the cost of living just kept us with our increase in income. we were living in the same hud subisidized housing that many of the single parents were living in. we didn't have nicer cars, nicer things, heck the other kids seems to have nicer toys than my kids, nicer clothes, they had cable tv, ect, some even had their daddy illegally living with them. I overheard my neighbor one day arguing with her husband as he was piling his things into the car.....guess they were expecting a visit from social services?. well, she's screaming at the top of her lungs about how she shouldn't have a job, who would take little jimmie to is baseball games, and who would do this for the little girl, blah, blah....
I was working, I had a husband living me working, we weren't even making enough to provide the standard of living that the government was handing out to this lady, compliments of we, the taxpayer. and well, quite frankly, why should I have to work so hard then, I have a husband at home, I has one more kid than she does, ain't nowone taking them to the ballgames, and they seem to be surviving!
I got news for ya lady...the only way I could get healthcare for myself is to work for a company that provides it! my husband doesn't make enough money to pay all the bills, plus the amount of money they would want to insure me through his job!
Do you really consider my wanting healthcare when I break an ankle selfish? gee, wonder where the kids would be then.....surely, mom wouldn't be cooking their meals for them if mom is never gonna walk again...

the divorce rate in this country I believe is still hovering around 50%, and like I've explained many times, I have four or five generations in my family attesting to the fact that there is probably a 50% chance that the end of any marriage will be the women having to shoulder at least part, if not all, of the financial burden of the family. so yes, I expect society, and the danged bosses to overcome the fear (which I really believe to be mostly unfounded) they might have of my monthy cycles. men have them too....and gee, the wold has kept turning all these millenia!

reply to post by dawnstar

to strip any legal standing that women have managed to achieve in the last hundred plus years would make them powerless to protect themselves from such abuse! absolute power corrupts absolutely! there would be more abuse if men knew that the women didn't have any alternative than to take it!

Huh? Nobody wants to strip any rights from anybody? Looks like your digging a trench and getting ready for battle.

This is all about people and families coming back to function in a way that is more beneficial for the family unit and children in particular.If a woman wants to work in no way am I suggesting she shouldn't. My beef is with the agenda that is completely changing the idea of the family unit into something nowhere as strong as it was previously. My beef is with the radical feminist agenda perverting the minds of young women and men to the point that dysfunction is pretty much assured.

Woman always have an alternative than to take abuse. Please don't blame men for this. Their are many good men that wouldn't dream of hitting a woman, even after being hit by a woman.

Woman should go to college they should learn skills to grow. They
shouldn't go based on the premise that they must so that when the divorce comes they will be prepared. Woman that consider being wives and mothers are nothing less than baby making machines and servants is perverting an idea that creates dissension well before the woman is in that position. It is establishing this role as unworthy and equating it to being a failure. I can tell you men are not the enemy here. We love woman we want intelligent woman to have families with to enjoy life with to bring up strong healthy free thinking people with. If you think the feminist movement isn't manipulating woman with homosexual ideas and trying to dismantle and disgrace the the nuclear family than we could argue about this issue for several days, weeks even.

Your free will is your free will. Men don't want to take this from you. The union of family should dictate the rolls so that the best results for the family unit are achieved. There is always self sacrifice in a family, it's not the idea that your being short changed , although I think many feminist are coming from this place and feel that it's a trick to short change woman
Don't let those bastards trick you into being baby making machine because you deserve better than that. Yikes I wouldn't touch a woman like that with a ten foot pole. Many men i suspect feel the same as I. What you end up with are woman and men That still want to get laid but don't really want to take it further. If they do if they follow the line of thinking discussed from the feminist perspective failure is often assured.

reply to post by jakyll

I believe some of his teachings have been misunderstood,mistranslated or deliberetly manipulated.

I believe that much new information is also coming out that shows a different side to Paul that is anything but complimentary. But I do understand the need to defend him, I did also, when I was part of religion.

Part of what I base my conviction on regarding Paul is the "feeling or essence" that he portrayed in his writings and not so much what his actions were. We can all cover up a multitude of sins through our service work, and still be a counterfeit person underneath.

My senses told me from the time I was young that there was something wrong with him. I have found many others who have said the same thing. But being part of a religion whose stability depends on him - one needs to remain quiet, as he is very often more quoted than the "true leader and teacher" - Jesus. Paul is the backbone of Christianity and is henceforth, the one that tends to be revered in word more than any other.

But, I believe it to be a sham (Christianity) as I believe that he was.

Here are a couple of books that I recommend;

"The Mythmaker - Paul and the Invention of Christianity" by Hyam Maccoby

"The Gnostic Gospels" by Elaine Pagels

"Paul the Mind of the Apostle" by A. N. Wilson (He is an advocate of Paul but finds that he cannot wholly defend him!)

"The Gospel According to Mary" by Miriam Therese Winter

reply to post by Swingarm

umm.....sorry, but to tell us to shut up and sit down, claim that GOD wants us, no commands us to submit and obey a husband, well, yes, that comes very close to attempting to take women's free will away!
like I said, any couple probably has a 50/50 chance of breaking up. my husband and me hasn't always agreed with each other. on those occassions, I'd say that some of the times, he was right, some of the times, I was right, and some of the times, neither of us were right. to tell me to shut up and sit down when I know that the actions that my husband is taking is gonna be harmful to not only me and my children, but him also and just to bow to his wishes, without pressing the issue in no way does the marriage good, and in truth does him a great disservice! no, god does want me to do that, I know better than that one! to make either one the one that gives in thru default consistantly guarentees you about a 50% rate of failure, simply because about 50% of the time, either you both will be wrong, or the one that is deciding will be wrong. if we allow both to act according to their own wisdom, well, that leaves them forced to hash it out, talk it over, and well, there's a much better chance of them coming to the right agreement...the marriage will have a better chance of lasting.

umm.....sorry, but to tell us to shut up and sit down, claim that GOD wants us, no commands us to submit and obey a husband, well, yes, that comes very close to attempting to take women's free will away!

reply to post by dawnstar


That nonsense is coming from the OP. I'm not talking about God in slightest. Did you read my post ? Please quote were I've lead you to make these conclusions.

[edit on 20-7-2008 by Swingarm]

Originally posted by Swingarm


That nonsense is coming from the OP. I'm not talking about God in slightest. Did you read my post ? Please quote were I've lead you to make these conclusions.

[edit on 20-7-2008 by Swingarm]

This is all about people and families coming back to function in a way that is more beneficial for the family unit and children in particular.If a woman wants to work in no way am I suggesting she shouldn't. My beef is with the agenda that is completely changing the idea of the family unit into something nowhere as strong as it was previously. My beef is with the radical feminist agenda perverting the minds of young women and men to the point that dysfunction is pretty much assured.

the only reason it was strong previously was that women were assigned as the default, and the laws of the land backed up the husband's power over her.
and, right now, it seems we have "radical" everything. if the "radical feminists are doing what you claim, then quite frankly, those radical neocon religious groups are doing what I am claiming! maybe if you took the word "feminist" away from describing this group, it wouldn't be so irratating. but to claim that Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Stanton, and the others that set us on the path that we refer to as feminism were radicals linked to communism it was over the line! that it is all these women going for the careers instead of accepting that traditional subservient role is the cause for all that is wrong is neglecting to recognize all those factors out there in the world that is driving the families apart....and many of those factors can be traced right back to our friendly government and their policies. In plain simple words......Giving the families enough money to actually live a decent life instead of practically insisting that a family give up one of it's members so the child can get the healthcare assistance they need, or a roof over their heads, well.....that would go way farther to making strong families than removing this "radical" element, unless of course, you wish to remove all the other radical elements out there.

Originally posted by Swingarm

umm.....sorry, but to tell us to shut up and sit down, claim that GOD wants us, no commands us to submit and obey a husband, well, yes, that comes very close to attempting to take women's free will away!

reply to post by dawnstar

 

That nonsense is coming from the OP. I'm not talking about God in slightest. Did you read my post ? Please quote were I've lead you to make these conclusions.

Uh Excuse me? Did you read my thread? Not one place in this thread did I condone treating women in this way! This belief is in the bible and what modern Christianity teaches. Do not kill the messenger please!

However I will withhold my personal feeling on the matter, because I choose too.

And besides it's obvious not one person here is going to shut up and sit down, but I have to admit all of this is rather amusing.

reply to post by dawnstar


Apparently you embrace socialism. We will have to agree to disagree. Carry on with your attack on men as wife beaters.

reply to post by dawnstar


Yeah someone pulled out the defibrillator's cause they knew there was life left in this thread.