Christian Forums

I think the best thing for men to do is remain single and focus on having a relationship with God and doing His will. When God's kingdom comes justice will be done. Until then there is always going to be conflict between people.

Quote from: ObeyTheGospel on Fri Jun 01, 2012 - 17:22:30
I think the best thing for men to do is remain single and focus on having a relationship with God and doing His will. When God's kingdom comes justice will be done. Until then there is always going to be conflict between people.

12 pages wrapped up into one post!

Quote from: DaveW on Fri Jun 01, 2012 - 12:09:05

Quote from: Man_Of_Honor on Fri Jun 01, 2012 - 09:52:04You do need to take abuse of any sorts from anyone.

Is there supposed to be a "not" in there somewhere???

Yes. Thank you for pointing that out. My apologies.

Quote from: ObeyTheGospel on Fri Jun 01, 2012 - 17:22:30
I think the best thing for men to do is remain single and focus on having a relationship with God and doing His will. When God's kingdom comes justice will be done. Until then there is always going to be conflict between people.

And how does one do that and proplerly obey the command to "be fruitful and multiply?"

 

I think wolflet hit the bullseye. 

Quote from: Kindle on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 12:56:38
I think wolflet hit the bullseye. 

I do what I can 

Quote from: wolflet7 on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 13:24:08

Quote from: Kindle on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 12:56:38
I think wolflet hit the bullseye. 

I do what I can 

   

We haven't been following the bible.  Let's return to the old path, spit out the culture that takes us off the narrow way.  1 Timothy 2:12 is still in God's Word.

Quote from: Taherd on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 13:56:38
We haven't been following the bible.  Let's return to the old path, spit out the culture that takes us off the narrow way.  1 Timothy 2:12 is still in God's Word.

And 1 Timothy 2:12 is still the good old boy's verse that is completely misunderstood. It's time culture got it right.

Quote from: Lively Stone on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 14:07:15

Quote from: Taherd on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 13:56:38
We haven't been following the bible.  Let's return to the old path, spit out the culture that takes us off the narrow way.  1 Timothy 2:12 is still in God's Word.

And 1 Timothy 2:12 is still the good old boy's verse that is completely misunderstood. It's time culture got it right.

So men do not want to be taught by women or have them in authority positions over them.

No matter how you slice it, you can't make a man acknowledge a woman's authority or allow her to teach him if he doesn't feel like it's in his interests.

And interestingly, that's something I've scarcely heard people try to disprove: that it's actually in a man's own interests to allow a woman to be his teacher and/or authority figure. The overwhelming emphasis of the discussion is about people's alleged attitudes of women being inferior.

At the end of the day, you simply cannot force people to be underneath the authority or teaching by someone they do not want. It's almost a non-issue in that regard. Men who do not believe in female priests and the like will just get up and leave. Hey, if somebody doesn't want ME (a man) to be a teacher or authority figure when I want, what am I going to do? Glue everyone to their seats and make them listen and show respect? It's their choice.

Quote from: Cally on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 17:24:43

Quote from: Lively Stone on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 14:07:15

Quote from: Taherd on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 13:56:38
We haven't been following the bible.  Let's return to the old path, spit out the culture that takes us off the narrow way.  1 Timothy 2:12 is still in God's Word.

And 1 Timothy 2:12 is still the good old boy's verse that is completely misunderstood. It's time culture got it right.

So men do not want to be taught by women or have them in authority positions over them.

No matter how you slice it, you can't make a man acknowledge a woman's authority or allow her to teach him if he doesn't feel like it's in his interests.

And interestingly, that's something I've scarcely heard people try to disprove: that it's actually in a man's own interests to allow a woman to be his teacher and/or authority figure. The overwhelming emphasis of the discussion is about people's alleged attitudes of women being inferior.

At the end of the day, you simply cannot force people to be underneath the authority or teaching by someone they do not want. It's almost a non-issue in that regard. Men who do not believe in female priests and the like will just get up and leave. Hey, if somebody doesn't want ME (a man) to be a teacher or authority figure when I want, what am I going to do? Glue everyone to their seats and make them listen and show respect? It's their choice.

I honestly think this is why God says not to...to protect women from men who close their ears simply because its a woman speaking. 

Quote from: MeMyself on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 18:03:50

Quote from: Cally on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 17:24:43

Quote from: Lively Stone on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 14:07:15

Quote from: Taherd on Mon Jun 04, 2012 - 13:56:38
We haven't been following the bible.  Let's return to the old path, spit out the culture that takes us off the narrow way.  1 Timothy 2:12 is still in God's Word.

And 1 Timothy 2:12 is still the good old boy's verse that is completely misunderstood. It's time culture got it right.

So men do not want to be taught by women or have them in authority positions over them.

No matter how you slice it, you can't make a man acknowledge a woman's authority or allow her to teach him if he doesn't feel like it's in his interests.

And interestingly, that's something I've scarcely heard people try to disprove: that it's actually in a man's own interests to allow a woman to be his teacher and/or authority figure. The overwhelming emphasis of the discussion is about people's alleged attitudes of women being inferior.

At the end of the day, you simply cannot force people to be underneath the authority or teaching by someone they do not want. It's almost a non-issue in that regard. Men who do not believe in female priests and the like will just get up and leave. Hey, if somebody doesn't want ME (a man) to be a teacher or authority figure when I want, what am I going to do? Glue everyone to their seats and make them listen and show respect? It's their choice.

I honestly think this is why God says not to...to protect women from men who close their ears simply because its a woman speaking. 

God's little secret that he never mentioned in scripture, that men were actually oppressing women all throughout human history, right? 

Actually I listen to women but if I can possibly help it, I don't acknowledge her as an appointed leader. And like I said, I'm entitled to having that choice, just like it's anyone's choice to decide who or who not to follow. Nobody is required to indulge me if I want to be a speaker/leader/teacher and likewise I don't have to indulge others if I don't want.

Quote from: Cally on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 18:17:28
God's little secret that he never mentioned in scripture, that men were actually oppressing women all throughout human history, right?  

Actually I listen to women but if I can possibly help it, I don't acknowledge her as an appointed leader. And like I said, I'm entitled to having that choice, just like it's anyone's choice to decide who or who not to follow. Nobody is required to indulge me if I want to be a speaker/leader/teacher and likewise I don't have to indulge others if I don't want.

The Bible didn't mention that I had a protein shake for breakfast this morning. I guess that means it didn't happen, right? The fact is that in the past, women had been kept from being allowed to work, being allowed to have much of any say in society, from being allowed to think freely and to be allowed to use that to freely invent things like so many men had in the past. They were not allowed to vote, and there are a lot of other things they were not allowed to do. They were treated quite literally like property. Are you going to deny the oppression that women STILL face in the Middle East, under Shariah Law? I hope not, because that would be hugely ignorant. And it doesn't matter if Shariah Law is Islamic and not Christian. It's still oppression of women.

And consider this, because the Bible does somewhat touch on the oppression of women in history. If you really ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?", Jesus in the Bible treated women with RESPECT, as EQUALS, and in a way that women were not treated back then under the laws that were in place, which WERE oppressive to women. Jesus went against those sexist laws by talking to a woman who was alone, which wasn't allowed back then. She was not allowed to engage in conversation with a stranger if she was alone. And in another situation, he saved a woman who was about to be stoned to death for committing adultery, while the male who was equally to blame (it takes two to commit adultery, after all) was not even brought in by the pharisees for punishment (and under Shariah Law, women can be raped, and then killed for it as punishment somehow, which is completely wrong and immaturely irresponsible on the man's part, not to mention completely idiotic and unGodly). Such treatment you condone would not be in his agreement at all. Did Jesus treat women that way? Certainly not.

Women are perfectly capable of teaching. It only relies on one's people skills and one's knowledge of a subject, both of which are strictly cerebral. The real idiotic thing here is thinking that one's genitalia determines how well one teaches. I've seen and had more female teachers than male, and they all did a bang-up job of teaching me and helping me whenever I needed it. Yes, it is possible for a woman to possess the same, or greater, knowledge and understanding of a subject as a man. *gasp!*

And actually I've found that women tend to have better people skills than men through the practice of simple observation.

And you're right, just like it's my choice not to have any respect for what you have to say. I'm a guy, btw. I respect human beings for who they are. This includes both men and women. I see no reason to see either as better than the other. If we're talking about physical strength, then clearly men as a whole are superior, but strength isn't the only thing that matters. When one speaks of what's better or worse, they usually mean OVERALL, and that's what I mean. I see no reason to see either better than the other, other than bigotry.

Quote from: ExtraOrdinary on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 19:29:44

Quote from: Cally on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 18:17:28
God's little secret that he never mentioned in scripture, that men were actually oppressing women all throughout human history, right?  

Actually I listen to women but if I can possibly help it, I don't acknowledge her as an appointed leader. And like I said, I'm entitled to having that choice, just like it's anyone's choice to decide who or who not to follow. Nobody is required to indulge me if I want to be a speaker/leader/teacher and likewise I don't have to indulge others if I don't want.

The Bible didn't mention that I had a protein shake for breakfast this morning. I guess that means it didn't happen, right?

Your whole post is a big "been there, done that" but for the moment, I'll just point out this comment that reflects that you'll probably be stubborn in discussion.

God got after Israel for failing to tithe, divorces, problems with sacrifices, and practically every other sort of issue that you can imagine on the occasion that it happened. But not a single mention of an alleged problem supposedly happening ALL THE TIME?

Ridiculous. God was passing judgment on mankind left and right, calling some good and some evil, and never once does this issue come up. Your protein shake isn't a moral issue, and like I say, your total lack of cooperation to recognize the point of what I said is enough to show that talking Bible  may not be fruitful to someone who loves worldly standards rather than Biblical.

Quote from: ExtraOrdinary on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 19:29:44

Quote from: Cally on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 18:17:28
God's little secret that he never mentioned in scripture, that men were actually oppressing women all throughout human history, right?  

Actually I listen to women but if I can possibly help it, I don't acknowledge her as an appointed leader. And like I said, I'm entitled to having that choice, just like it's anyone's choice to decide who or who not to follow. Nobody is required to indulge me if I want to be a speaker/leader/teacher and likewise I don't have to indulge others if I don't want.

The Bible didn't mention that I had a protein shake for breakfast this morning. I guess that means it didn't happen, right? The fact is that in the past, women had been kept from being allowed to work, being allowed to have much of any say in society, from being allowed to think freely and to be allowed to use that to freely invent things like so many men had in the past. They were not allowed to vote, and there are a lot of other things they were not allowed to do. They were treated quite literally like property. Are you going to deny the oppression that women STILL face in the Middle East, under Shariah Law? I hope not, because that would be hugely ignorant. And it doesn't matter if Shariah Law is Islamic and not Christian. It's still oppression of women.

And consider this, because the Bible does somewhat touch on the oppression of women in history. If you really ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?", Jesus in the Bible treated women with RESPECT, as EQUALS, and in a way that women were not treated back then under the laws that were in place, which WERE oppressive to women. Jesus went against those sexist laws by talking to a woman who was alone, which wasn't allowed back then. She was not allowed to engage in conversation with a stranger if she was alone. And in another situation, he saved a woman who was about to be stoned to death for committing adultery, while the male who was equally to blame (it takes two to commit adultery, after all) was not even brought in by the pharisees for punishment (and under Shariah Law, women can be raped, and then killed for it as punishment somehow, which is completely wrong and immaturely irresponsible on the man's part, not to mention completely idiotic and unGodly). Such treatment you condone would not be in his agreement at all. Did Jesus treat women that way? Certainly not.

Women are perfectly capable of teaching. It only relies on one's people skills and one's knowledge of a subject, both of which are strictly cerebral. The real idiotic thing here is thinking that one's genitalia determines how well one teaches. I've seen and had more female teachers than male, and they all did a bang-up job of teaching me and helping me whenever I needed it. Yes, it is possible for a woman to possess the same, or greater, knowledge and understanding of a subject as a man. *gasp!*

And actually I've found that women tend to have better people skills than men through the practice of simple observation.

And you're right, just like it's my choice not to have any respect for what you have to say. I'm a guy, btw. I respect human beings for who they are. This includes both men and women. I see no reason to see either as better than the other. If we're talking about physical strength, then clearly men as a whole are superior, but strength isn't the only thing that matters. When one speaks of what's better or worse, they usually mean OVERALL, and that's what I mean. I see no reason to see either better than the other, other than bigotry.

Wow, ExtraOrdinary -  You knocked my bonnet in the creek with that post!  I thought it was a woman posting and then you said,  "I'm a guy, btw."  No, sir, you are not a guy, you are a man ---- a gentleman.   Highest regards and a deep bow to you.     

Quote from: Cally on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 20:01:54Your whole post is a big "been there, done that" but for the moment, I'll just point out this comment that reflects that you'll probably be stubborn in discussion.

God got after Israel for failing to tithe, divorces, problems with sacrifices, and practically every other sort of issue that you can imagine on the occasion that it happened. But not a single mention of an alleged problem supposedly happening ALL THE TIME?

Ridiculous. God was passing judgment on mankind left and right, calling some good and some evil, and never once does this issue come up. Your protein shake isn't a moral issue, and like I say, your total lack of cooperation to recognize the point of what I said is enough to show that talking Bible  may not be fruitful to someone who loves worldly standards rather than Biblical.

So is the oppression of women. You're not about to deny the oppression that women face even today in other countries. You are not about to. You may be about to TRY to deny it, but the fact remains that it's just a bunch of malarkey. People can see the oppression of women under Shariah Law and in other parts of the world. They see the news and the things that goes on, especially how women who are raped are then put to death because they are blamed for being raped.

And the oppression of women in the US up until recently is also no secret. Do not pretend to be ignorant to it.

And, I guess you're going to say that because God didn't get into Israel for it, that he's ok with women being raped, and then killed for it, because that's what is, and has been, happening to women. Maybe it's because it wasn't happening in Israel, and that other parts of the world do exist. Also, maybe it's because God expects us to realize what is right and what is wrong. Where has he EVER condoned rape?

If you do some actual historic studying and look-back into old and ancient times, you'll find a lot of laws to be discriminatory, and therefore oppressive, toward women.

Also, you COMPLETELY ignored this snippit I posted, which WAS talking Bible, showing that you really didn't read my post before responding, something I will also be doing with you, however I will also not bother responding anymore either. This is what you missed:

"And consider this, because the Bible does somewhat touch on the oppression of women in history. If you really ask yourself "What Would Jesus Do?", Jesus in the Bible treated women with RESPECT, as EQUALS, and in a way that women were not treated back then under the laws that were in place, which WERE oppressive to women. Jesus went against those sexist laws by talking to a woman who was alone, which wasn't allowed back then. She was not allowed to engage in conversation with a stranger if she was alone. And in another situation, he saved a woman who was about to be stoned to death for committing adultery, while the male who was equally to blame (it takes two to commit adultery, after all) was not even brought in by the pharisees for punishment (and under Shariah Law, women can be raped, and then killed for it as punishment somehow, which is completely wrong and immaturely irresponsible on the man's part, not to mention completely idiotic and unGodly). Such treatment you condone would not be in his agreement at all. Did Jesus treat women that way? Certainly not."

However, you are not talking Bible at all. Jesus certainly did go after the oppression of women back then, by opposing those very laws that oppressed them, and he treated them like EQUALS. This was a serious thing back then, and even the disciples kinda backed away because it was unlawful for a woman to speak with a stranger when she was alone, which is sexist. It's not a non-discriminating law at all.

And there countless travesties which have and still occur today. The Bible does not cover all of them specifically. Does that make them okay? I'm pretty sure God gave us the ability to use common sense and discernment for a reason.

Don't you dare point fingers at me. I made my Biblical point, a much more valid one than the ridiculous point you tried to make. Jesus' actions in the Bible, which I mentioned, set standards that you're not following. It's you who does not follow the standards. How dare you treat any human as less for something as insignificant as gender, when Jesus did NOT. Jesus lead by example, which clearly you are not following in this instance.

Like I said, I'm also free to choose not to respect what you have to say. This utter hypocrisy just further solidifies that stance.

And your stance against women teachers sort of (more like definitely) opposes God, who has appointed women apostles (AKA TEACHERS). Junia was one of them, and Debrorah was a JUDGE in Israel. And let's not forget Phillip, whose 4 virgin daughters were all prophetesses (prophet meaning teacher, and prophetess being a FEMALE prophet). And the book of Acts and the book of Joel both say that both sons AND DAUGHTERS shall prophecy. There was also Priscilla, whom Paul had a pet name for, due to being close to her. She and her husband ran Bible studies in their church (their home), and she was the leader of this get-together. Even Paul acknowledged it, and he would address her FIRST when writing to her and her husband. I could go on. Don't you dare point and say I'M the one not following Biblical principles.

Quote from: Lavender on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 20:32:25Wow, ExtraOrdinary -  You knocked my bonnet in the creek with that post!  I thought it was a woman posting and then you said,  "I'm a guy, btw."  No, sir, you are not a guy, you are a man ---- a gentleman.   Highest regards and a deep bow to you.    

Thank you. I care nothing for the opinions of people who would put other people down under such bigoted pretenses, which Jesus certainly did not do. There are plenty of women I know who are smarter than me, better than me at different things (such as video games, cooking, driving, problem solving, comforting, and any little thing you could think of), stronger than me, etc.. I simply can't fathom the logic behind believing that my gender makes me superior to people who can outclass me in many different areas. People who are truly superior than others in something do so by their own merit, and not by something as trivial as gender (or race, etc.).

This person I replied to also seems to be completely oblivious to the suffering women face in the Middle East, with Shariah Law. I see that the US is slowly trying to adopt this law as the standard and I pray it doesn't. It's bad enough in the Middle East, but I don't want to see women (and Christians) suffer from this insidious law because for some reason it's being pushed in the US. I can't fathom how Cally seems to somehow be oblivious to that suffering and oppression going on overseas to be denying any oppression completely.

I hope no one ever tries to treat you like a lesser being for your gender (I'm gonna assume you're a girl because of the name, sorry if I'm wrong XD). God equally created the entire human race in, and He said that it was good. ALL of it.

Also don't let people use the story of Adam and Eve to put women down because Adam was formed first. Adam ("eth ha adam" in Hebrew meaning "THE man") was formed in Genesis 2:7, on the 8th day which was AFTER God rested. Man ("adam" in Hebrew meaning "mankind) was made in Genesis 1:26, on the 6th day, before He rested. Two different events. We were all created equal. God meant that, and no one should try to convince you otherwise for the purpose of putting you down.

And heck, in Genesis 1:27-28, before Adam came into the picture, it says God created BOTH male and female, blessed them BOTH, and gave them BOTH dominion over the earth. Some say that Genesis 2 is a recap of Genesis 1, but while the word "adam" and "eth ha adam" used have vastly different meanings in and of themselves, also the order of creation in Genesis 2 is different than in Genesis 1, showing that it's not the same creation. On the 6th day, both male and female were created equally. There is no doubt about that.

Anyway, I'm running my mouth off a bit. My mom would like to joke about the meaning of my name (Justin) in instances like this. Idk, I just know I get really passionate when I see such unfairness and hypocrisy. When it makes someone's day, it makes it all worth it. So thank you again. Even if it's just you, you've made it worth saying what I said.

I really appreciate it!  

"ExtraOrdinary"

Accusations that do not have any scripture to support them make me sleepy. 

There are plenty out there. Another we hear a lot is how bigoted and hateful it is to condemn the practice of homosexuality. I'm ready for things like that--things like this are entering the church and I drew a very firm line that I won't let be crossed

As we can see with Lavender, many women will respond to flattery and surround themselves with what their itching ears want to hear.

Face it: nobody is charged with sexism according to modern American standards by God. It never happened in scripture (many, many men of God were commended without a recorded need for being rebuked for it), there's no reason that someone will be in hot water with God for it, whereas many today are looking for reasons to disregard scriptures speaking directly to females (about male/female differences).

In fact, •Isaiah◦3:12 As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. My people, those who lead you cause you to err, and destroy the way of your paths.

We can even see an instance of God complaining about women ruling over men. But this dreaded bad, terrible thing that happened all throughout human history until the allegedly enlightened modern United States came along? Not even a single word.

I've said it earlier in this thread which I kind of doubt you read, but my issue with the "oppression of women" is this: You can come up with all kinds of stories about attrocities committed against women and for the most part I believe they deserve sympathy as individual cases.

HOWEVER, when it is loaded with the insinuation that men, by comparison, have it on easy street; as if men are hardly ever done wrong by women or only to a negligible extent; then you've deceptively introduced a fallacy into the discussion.

Women are wronged by men. Men are wronged by women. God's not okay with any of that, but he has shown no judgment against any sort of "oppression of women" in the way you want to suggest.

And again, sorry, Jesus being on a quest for gender equality? Again, we'd him speaking directly on the subject. You're looking at scriptures with a lens of romantic modern American passion for an idea in conflict with God.

You've put words of judgment into God's mouth.

You're in large company, but that changes nothing with regard to God's judgment.

Your modern sensibilities have turned the modern world into a disaster. Families are breaking down, women are even attempting to be "liberated" of having to use their bodies for the duty of carrying a developing child in their wombs for nine months after they get pregnant and consider themselves entitled to the right to murder.

1 Timothy 2 is talking about a teacher relationship carrying with it authority, such as a school teacher, drill instructor or other trainer, etc. It's not talking about having a conversation with a woman and asking her opinion on something or asking her to explain something you don't know. It's a student/mentor relationship--personally, I will not acknowledge a woman as suitable for that role with a man.

ExtraOrdinary -    Well said, in both posts!!!

Cally - ExtraOrdinary supported his last post with scripture; he just didn't post it.  If you want to go back to Judges, etc. to see what he means, then go ahead.  But don't make an arrogant statement saying that he doesn't have any scriptural evidence in his post and is not taking this in a Christian manner.  Imo, your posts against ExtraOrdinary have been pretty (very) arrogant and not convincing at all.  Just the opposite in fact.  It's very childish and unChristian to point fingers, especially at a SPECIFIC GENDER!  A gender as a whole means nothing to me.  That's like an alien from outer space saying that humans all like tuna on their sandwich.  I don't like tuna on my sandwich, btw.  And if you want to be really technical, I'm sure you would argue that tuna has nothing to do with spiritual actions, so you could replace tuna with something such as not fasting, lying, or the like. 

To be a Man, we have to follow the manliest person who ever existed, Jesus.  Jesus is the model for what a Man should be, not a boy.  From the looks of it, ExtraOrdinary seems to be doing pretty well at being a Man.

Thank you, have a nice day

Quote from: wolflet7 on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 23:20:07
ExtraOrdinary -    Well said, in both posts!!!

Cally - ExtraOrdinary supported his last post with scripture; he just didn't post it.  If you want to go back to Judges, etc. to see what he means, then go ahead.  But don't make an arrogant statement saying that he doesn't have any scriptural evidence in his post and is not taking this in a Christian manner.  Imo, your posts against ExtraOrdinary have been pretty (very) arrogant and not convincing at all.  Just the opposite in fact.  It's very childish and unChristian to point fingers, especially at a SPECIFIC GENDER!  A gender as a whole means nothing to me.  That's like an alien from outer space saying that humans all like tuna on their sandwich.  I don't like tuna on my sandwich, btw.  And if you want to be really technical, I'm sure you would argue that tuna has nothing to do with spiritual actions, so you could replace tuna with something such as not fasting, lying, or the like.  

To be a Man, we have to follow the manliest person who ever existed, Jesus.  Jesus is the model for what a Man should be, not a boy.  From the looks of it, ExtraOrdinary seems to be doing pretty well at being a Man.

Thank you, have a nice day

I've been around this debate many times having heard the same rehearsed popular theology supporting modern attitudes. Sure, Deborah was a judge, but I've heard a fair number of people point out out that she tried to get Barak to "take a lead" as it were.

"ExtraOrdinary" cannot point to a passage of scripture that remotely says anything he wants it to, such as "treat women as equals" (in the modern American sense) and frankly, he should look at the rest of this thread. If women really were treated as equals I think they'd realize just how rough men have had to have it in order to be providers throughout history.

But in the modern world, it's looking like it's coming to that. Maybe you're okay with it wolflet, but there is a RAPIDLY growing number of men (and women, actually) who are sick of the "treat us as equals but give us the chivalry perks" attitude and are fixing to see if we can really see how real, actual "gender equality" will actually work out.

At any rate, I'd like to see "ExtraOrdinary" at least check out what's already been said on the thread. I'm sure he'll find plenty more to complain about.

Quote from: wolflet7 on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 23:20:07
ExtraOrdinary -    Well said, in both posts!!!

Cally - ExtraOrdinary supported his last post with scripture; he just didn't post it.  If you want to go back to Judges, etc. to see what he means, then go ahead.  But don't make an arrogant statement saying that he doesn't have any scriptural evidence in his post and is not taking this in a Christian manner.  Imo, your posts against ExtraOrdinary have been pretty (very) arrogant and not convincing at all.  Just the opposite in fact.  It's very childish and unChristian to point fingers, especially at a SPECIFIC GENDER!  A gender as a whole means nothing to me.  That's like an alien from outer space saying that humans all like tuna on their sandwich.  I don't like tuna on my sandwich, btw.  And if you want to be really technical, I'm sure you would argue that tuna has nothing to do with spiritual actions, so you could replace tuna with something such as not fasting, lying, or the like. 

To be a Man, we have to follow the manliest person who ever existed, Jesus.  Jesus is the model for what a Man should be, not a boy.  From the looks of it, ExtraOrdinary seems to be doing pretty well at being a Man.

Thank you, have a nice day

         

Cally

You bet I'd prefer being surrounded by gentlemen such as ExtraOrdinary rather than some of the flame throwers around here.   I, personally, perfer a little Cortisone for the ears to a couple bottles of Pepto Bismol for the stomach.

Quote from: Lavender on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 23:58:48
Cally

You bet I'd prefer being surrounded by gentlemen such as ExtraOrdinary rather than some of the flame throwers around here.   I, personally, perfer a little Cortisone for the ears to a couple bottles of Pepto Bismol for the stomach.

Color me surprised. 

Quote from: Cally on Sat Jun 09, 2012 - 00:03:09

Quote from: Lavender on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 23:58:48
Cally

You bet I'd prefer being surrounded by gentlemen such as ExtraOrdinary rather than some of the flame throwers around here.   I, personally, perfer a little Cortisone for the ears to a couple bottles of Pepto Bismol for the stomach.

Color me surprised. 

Nah, I think green would be right.

Quote from: Lavender on Sat Jun 09, 2012 - 02:04:01

Quote from: Cally on Sat Jun 09, 2012 - 00:03:09

Quote from: Lavender on Fri Jun 08, 2012 - 23:58:48
Cally

You bet I'd prefer being surrounded by gentlemen such as ExtraOrdinary rather than some of the flame throwers around here.   I, personally, perfer a little Cortisone for the ears to a couple bottles of Pepto Bismol for the stomach.

Color me surprised. 

Nah, I think green would be right.

Green? 

I did not put the list below to compare and contrast men issues and women issues. This is to indicate that men in this date do not have it any easier as many thinks.

1) Building Fellowship; reconnecting to meaningful & supportive fellowship with each other.

2) Fatherhood Support - Father's rights, the problem of fathers being asked to "pay and stay away,

There were menservants and exiles whom were men in the past. Slavery was impacted on BOTH genders.

Quote from: Man_Of_Honor on Sat Jun 09, 2012 - 07:48:40
I did not put the list below to compare and contrast men issues and women issues. This is to indicate that men in this date do not have it any easier as many thinks.

1) Building Fellowship; reconnecting to meaningful & supportive fellowship with each other.

2) Fatherhood Support - Father's rights, the problem of fathers being asked to "pay and stay away,

Quote from: Kindle on Sat Jun 09, 2012 - 08:44:37

Quote from: Man_Of_Honor on Sat Jun 09, 2012 - 07:48:40
I did not put the list below to compare and contrast men issues and women issues. This is to indicate that men in this date do not have it any easier as many thinks.

1) Building Fellowship; reconnecting to meaningful & supportive fellowship with each other.

2) Fatherhood Support - Father's rights, the problem of fathers being asked to "pay and stay away,

ObeyThe Gospel...a very interesting handle.

What say the scriptures about this issue you bring to the table?

Does our 21st century westernized American culture have any influence forming our perceptions?

Just what is Feminism...really, and how has it affected our life?

Since the fall of mankind in the garden the relationship between men and women was changed for the worse. Man was created as the head from the beginning, and woman was his helpmeet. It was to Adam that God gave instructions to, and he in turn instructed his wife. This process is still in effect today... if one obeys the Gospel.

The relationship between men and women is to be a mutual respect and love for one another. Not only for men and women, but every person should respect each other by virtue of the fact that we are all a part of God's creation. However, since we all have been negatively affected by the world we must endeavour to practise the Gospel message daily.

Rom 12:1  I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
Rom 12:2  And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
Rom 12:3  For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.

Rom 12:10  Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honour preferring one another;
Rom 12:11  Not slothful in business; fervent in spirit; serving the Lord;
Rom 12:12  Rejoicing in hope; patient in tribulation; continuing instant in prayer;
Rom 12:13  Distributing to the necessity of saints; given to hospitality.
Rom 12:14  Bless them which persecute you: bless, and curse not.
Rom 12:15  Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep.
Rom 12:16  Be of the same mind one toward another. Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits.
Rom 12:17  Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
Rom 12:18  If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
Rom 12:19  Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Rom 12:20  Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
Rom 12:21  Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

This is the Gospel message we are to obey...it is a hard saying but it is TRUTH!

Feminism as a belief system has a long history and it's effects have been far reaching in this country. ABC has a tag line at the bottom of their logo on some shows, with a voiceover which say's, "A New Kind Of Family". That is what this belief system has been doing for the last 50 or so years... creating a new kind of family. How many tv commercials depict a man being emasculated by a woman in varring dergees? How many men and his children have been torn assunder by this evil system through the inequality of the "justice" system?

No longer is a family considered a working father, a mother at home teaching her children, and they together raising up a generation of God fearing adults. Now I understand that this 50's description of the family seems corny, we would have to go back when America was an agricultural society to recapture the closeness of a family working in sync for their survival.

We are where we are now and each one of us can live according to the strict requirements of the Gospel message if we be not hearers only. I speak as though I am addressing those of the Household of God...

Good Day,

BlackSheep

One would not necessarily have to return to pre-1950's or even some sort of agrarian society for a traditional or God-lead or Biblically directed sort of marriage.  I detest the rational that following God's idea of how things will work entails going back in time.  It doesn't and a wise person should realize a living God would not require a static creation.  God simply requires we follow his Will and guidance.  He never said it requires a certain era or time period or career field. The point of God's salvation and our hope is that He sent His Son to save us...no matter who we are or where we are at or what we do.

God created Adam and his helpmate in a perfect environment, before the fall of man.  Thereafter, and now, we live in a sin filled fallen world.  Anytime any of us put down, objectify or disgrace another, be it male or female, we speak and act against God's sovereign Will and his commandment of loving one another.

As a feminist (and I have been one since before I was saved and know the difference!!) I will say a big thank you to Jesus for loving me as a child of God and accepting me into His family.  I will say a husband and wife should love each other and let the dang man lead in prayer if that is what spiritual discernment and the Bible tell you.

I will also say that females like me maybe should remain single and work on tact/speaking the truth with grace so we don't make misled little boys  *cough* cry and force them to be accountable for their projected insecurities.  Just sayin' ;)

Quote from: p.progress on Sun Jun 10, 2012 - 12:56:54
testing only


{quote}
BAM is a good man
{/quote}

What? 

Quote from: MeMyself on Sun Jun 10, 2012 - 12:58:20

Quote from: p.progress on Sun Jun 10, 2012 - 12:56:54
testing only


{quote}
BAM is a good man
{/quote}

What? 

A test...was only a test to make sure I quote properly.

Quote from: p.progress on Sun Jun 10, 2012 - 13:00:51

Quote from: MeMyself on Sun Jun 10, 2012 - 12:58:20

Quote from: p.progress on Sun Jun 10, 2012 - 12:56:54
testing only


{quote}
BAM is a good man
{/quote}

What? 

A test...was only a test to make sure I quote properly.

Gottcha!

Quote
One would not necessarily have to return to pre-1950's or even some sort of agrarian society for a traditional or God-lead or Biblically directed sort of marriage.  I detest the rational that following God's idea of how things will work entails going back in time.  It doesn't and a wise person should realize a living God would not require a static creation.  God simply requires we follow his Will and guidance.  He never said it requires a certain era or time period or career field.

We are in agreement then... my use of an agrarian society is by way of example of the cloesness we once had as a society as a whole. Not that God is limited in His power to preserve a family based upon "their" social status. Although the simplicity of the Gospel is real, it becomes unproductive when one does not abide in Christ.

Quote
God created Adam and his helpmate in a perfect environment, before the fall of man.  Thereafter, and now, we live in a sin filled fallen world.  Anytime any of us put down, objectify or disgrace another, be it male or female, we speak and act against God's sovereign Will and his commandment of loving one another.

Here again we are in agreement... however, the difficulty of the woman's position as a result of the transgression against God's Law is real. (Gen 3:16  Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.)

Quote
As a feminist (and I have been one since before I was saved and know the difference!!) I will say a big thank you to Jesus for loving me as a child of God and accepting me into His family.  I will say a husband and wife should love each other and let the dang man lead in prayer if that is what spiritual discernment and the Bible tell you.

Yes! Thank God that while we were yet sinners Christ died for the ungodly. I know that God loved me enough to save me and enough not to leave me the way He found me. I would like to understand your diffinition of "feminist". I find it interesting the words chosen to describe the interaction of the wife to the husband..."let the dang man lead in prayer..." Dang, being a slang for "damn", and using "the man" instead giving honor to the man as husband. Have you ever been married?

Quote
I will also say that females like me maybe should remain single and work on tact/speaking the truth with grace so we don't make misled little boys  *cough* cry and force them to be accountable for their projected insecurities.  Just sayin' ;)

We are in agreement here as well..."females" like you should remain single that you may devote yourself to the Lord.

1Co 7:32  But I would have you without carefulness. He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord:
1Co 7:33  But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife.
1Co 7:34  There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband.

Good Day

BlackSheep