Pauls statements against women.

reply to post by kimish

Christians should heed Christ Jesus. Period.

Sounds great.
Tell that to Christians who quote from Paul...whenever they feel the need to.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by kimish

 

Christians should heed Christ Jesus. Period.

Sounds great.
Tell that to Christians who quote from Paul...whenever they feel the need to.

I try to! For real. And than I tell them that if Christ were to have known that his teachings would become a religion he would be perturbed. He did not want to be worshiped, he wanted us to worship our Father, his Father, our Lord, God (the Christian name)

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by kimish

 

Christians should heed Christ Jesus. Period.

Sounds great.
Tell that to Christians who quote from Paul...whenever they feel the need to.

Now, I would like to point out that I like Paul and see no problem with quoting him, as many have no problem with quoting a pundit or expert on one thing or another. But care does need to be taken to separate advice and opinion from the weightier bits, as well as being mindful about not mistaking Paul, as Peter warned is fairly easy to do.

Carry on.

Originally posted by 0mage
that is all because of the fall. it was woman's fault for listening to the serpent and man's fault for listening to the woman. so.. AND IT IS VERY FAIR TREATMENT if u ask me.. to tell women.. to shutup when they are out of place!

No man should submit to a woman. sorry ladies but that's just the way it is. there are many other occurrences which speak of why the woman must be quiet and submissive to the man.

this simply so that woman doesnt make us fall any further. yeah i know she's got her painful childbirth as punishment and we got the easy side.. but that doesnt mean.. some woman somewhere wont open her mouth to take charge of a man in ignorance and mislead him...


then even tho you followed their instructions to the letter.. when everything flops they blame the man. men take charge..

Peace

So basically, men are so weak that all their transgressions are the fault of a woman.

Wow.

My guess is you'd really enjoy reading the Malleus Maleficarum and burning witches at the stake.

There are some things in Paul's writings that are reflective of Paul's time, but are they reflective of Paul? He spends a bit of time with greetings, and one will take note that about 1/3 of the people whom he greets, who are high enough in the church hierarchy for him to be acquainted with them, are women.

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae. I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of his people and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been the benefactor of many people, including me.

Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my co-workers in Christ Jesus. (Romans 16:1-3 NIV)

"Our sister Phoebe", a deacon in the church? That's pretty progressive -- women cannot be Deacons in the Catholic Church today, and the church in Paul's time was the church that he established.

Priscilla (Prisca) seems to hold a special place in Paul's heart, along with her husband Aquila -- she is mentioned quite frequently in Paul's epistles, as well as in Acts.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n

I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,
-1 Timothy 2:9

I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet.
-1 Timothy 2:12

Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says.
-1 Cor 14:34

If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.
-1 Corinthians 14:35




Now either there is nothing wrong with instructing women to "remain silent" or these verses are forgeries.
Its clear that Paul had a certain view towards women.

What do christians think? Do they ensure that their women follow Pauls instructions?

Also does anybody else think its ironic how Paul refers to the "law" in 1 Cor 14:34..... despite him speaking against the law in other verss?

edit on 15-8-2012 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

And we are supposed to learn how to look beyond duality from this person 2000 years later? This is a perfect example how you should look at the message and by it you can see where the message comes from. From a healty tree comes healthy fruits. From a unhealty tree comes rotten fruit.

Originally posted by Fitch303I hate when people talk about all the bad things in the Christian bible that nobody follows or enforces anymore.

You can't justify the whole Bible. It contradicts itself in many places even within the New Testament alone, Paul being the misfit and contradicts even his own teachings, he changes his mind a lot showing he is not inspired of the Holy Spirit.

If Paul is not a misfit, then Jesus would be. Whose teachings would you choose to disregard?

The teachings of Jesus taken in its literal context is radically different than the rest of the Bible. To justify the whole Bible as as pieces of puzzle fitting together perfectly is practically deceiving yourself.

First time I read the Bible whole without any person to teach and guide me. I was already a Christian then, I saw a lot of contradictions. I told this to my Christian parents and boy, they were quick to rebuke me and my interpretation of the teachings of Jesus.

My Christian parents told me to have someone else to guide me in the Bible, maybe go to a Bible study. But this is also what Jesus teaches:

1 John 2:27
"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."

It's the Holy Spirit that reveals you the Truth. The Bible is just like another 'sand' to find buried truth (treasure) from. There are many 'sands' to look from. Secular information in ATS I found to contain much truths, not all but if you have the Holy Spirit not the spirit of the antichrist to guide you, you'll find it.

A true Bible study should be to disregard all that we previously know about being Christian and read the Bible without bias. We test all the teachings, not assume it's all correct and agreeing. Them come together and discuss the truths found in the Bible.

Many Christians are 'landlocked' into Paul's statement that all scriptures are inspired by the Holy Spirit when Jesus said nothing about such thing.

The promise of Jesus is not a book/scripture but a Spirit to guide you into all truths.

Many of Paul's teachings deny the teachings of Jesus. He is probably the antichrist 'that was already here' Jesus was referring to before he left his disciples for heaven.

Jesus warns that MANY more antichrists will come so this title is not just for one person especially one with ridiculously deep voice and makes the baphomet sign every second, no. Anyone who denies Jesus or his Father is the antichrist. It's not as simple as denying Jesus or the Father exists, but to deny their teachings is to deny them.

A lot of Christians today, are doing the exact thing, denying Jesus' teachings which they think is too radical for their lifestyles. They could not quote another one of Jesus teachings to 'refute' another one he said. But this is because Jesus doesn't change his mind. He tells similar things, similar ideas, over and over...

Anything inspired of the Holy Spirit is like puzzle fitting together perfectly, they don't contradict each other, there is no compromise. You will never hear to be 'in the world' to preach the gospel.

Back to topic Jesus did not say anything against women, during his time, nor in the future. In fact, Mary Magdalene broke a women's law when she poured the expensive perfume over Jesus, bared her hair wiped off the excess perfume with her hair. Jesus never said anything bad (the disciples did), not even a bit, but only praises for Magdalene's incredible demonstration of her love for Jesus.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n


You think that's bad, go read the gospel of Thomas (saying 114) that people love so much. Now THAT book is empowering for women.

The problem in picking out a few verses from the bible like these really is context. I could write a whole essay on these, and several other verses from a Christian and biblical perspective. In other words, there is no easy answer.

But without going into a history lesson, and a full blown bible study starting at Genesis, we'll instead look at some key verses that exemplify this part of Christian doctrine.

John 3:29

He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

In this chapter, John the Baptist calls Jesus the bridegroom. This is important, because the following verses I'll quote explain, from a Christian perspective, what that means, and what marriage represents...

Ephesians 5:24

Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

Ephesians 5:25

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it

1 Peter 3:7

Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

So then, marriage is to exemplify the relationship between Christ and the church. This is one reason why men are head of the wife from a Christian perspective.

While the verses you picked may seem harsh, and would be today, they were part and parcel of the attitude of that time. They weren't meant to be taken as commandments for all time, which is why there are many other verses which balance this out if all are taken in context.

What does this have to do with women in general? 3 verses:
1 Timothy 2:13

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

1Corinthians 11:8-9

8For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. 9Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man

From the Jewish, and from the Christian perspective, God has a "pecking" order. Man first, and then woman. Does that mean woman is somehow inferior to man biblically? No. The new covenant effectively ended the curse pronounced on Eve. Men and women are equal in the eyes of God with the exception of his order, and the exemplification of the bridegroom and bride representing Christ and the church.

That's as nutshell as I can do. Maybe adjensen or Noturtypical can refine it and expound on the places I chose not to go.

Originally posted by Klassified
The problem in picking out a few verses from the bible like these really is context. I could write a whole essay on these, and several other verses from a Christian and biblical perspective. In other words, there is no easy answer.

But without going into a history lesson, and a full blown bible study starting at Genesis, we'll instead look at some key verses that exemplify this part of Christian doctrine.

John 3:29

He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

In this chapter, John the Baptist calls Jesus the bridegroom. This is important, because the following verses I'll quote explain, from a Christian perspective, what that means, and what marriage represents...

Ephesians 5:24

Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

Ephesians 5:25

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it

1 Peter 3:7

Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.

So then, marriage is to exemplify the relationship between Christ and the church. This is one reason why men are head of the wife from a Christian perspective.

While the verses you picked may seem harsh, and would be today, they were part and parcel of the attitude of that time. They weren't meant to be taken as commandments for all time, which is why there are many other verses which balance this out if all are taken in context.

What does this have to do with women in general? 3 verses:
1 Timothy 2:13

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.

1Corinthians 11:8-9

8For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. 9Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man

From the Jewish, and from the Christian perspective, God has a "pecking" order. Man first, and then woman. Does that mean woman is somehow inferior to man biblically? No. The new covenant effectively ended the curse pronounced on Eve. Men and women are equal in the eyes of God with the exception of his order, and the exemplification of the bridegroom and bride representing Christ and the church.

That's as nutshell as I can do. Maybe adjensen or Noturtypical can refine it and expound on the places I chose not to go.

This is 100% correct.
Where most people go wrong is interpreting these verses as a rights issue.
It is not a rights issue, it is a ROLES issue.

God gave specific roles to men and women. God is not politically correct; he is simply correct.
In the created order, and within the church, God ordained men to teach. This is what Paul is referring to.
This does not mean that women cannot or do not have ministries within the church. They can, and do, and are a vital part of the body of Christ... teaching and having authority over a man, however, are not one of those roles, according to Scripture.

When Paul spoke these words to Tim the world was quite different and Paul had traveled to many lands where the worship of Dianna was in play. Many women then could be temple Preistiest and to put it mildly whores of the temple too. Paul taught modesty in all things and at that time period women speaking in the Jewish temple was forbidden. So there was a seperation of men and women. Older women were to teach the younger women and men taught men.

Originally posted by ahnggk

Originally posted by Fitch303I hate when people talk about all the bad things in the Christian bible that nobody follows or enforces anymore.

You can't justify the whole Bible. It contradicts itself in many places even within the New Testament alone, Paul being the misfit and contradicts even his own teachings, he changes his mind a lot showing he is not inspired of the Holy Spirit.

If Paul is not a misfit, then Jesus would be. Whose teachings would you choose to disregard?

The teachings of Jesus taken in its literal context is radically different than the rest of the Bible. To justify the whole Bible as as pieces of puzzle fitting together perfectly is practically deceiving yourself.

First time I read the Bible whole without any person to teach and guide me. I was already a Christian then, I saw a lot of contradictions. I told this to my Christian parents and boy, they were quick to rebuke me and my interpretation of the teachings of Jesus.

My Christian parents told me to have someone else to guide me in the Bible, maybe go to a Bible study. But this is also what Jesus teaches:

1 John 2:27
"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."

It's the Holy Spirit that reveals you the Truth. The Bible is just like another 'sand' to find buried truth (treasure) from. There are many 'sands' to look from. Secular information in ATS I found to contain much truths, not all but if you have the Holy Spirit not the spirit of the antichrist to guide you, you'll find it.

A true Bible study should be to disregard all that we previously know about being Christian and read the Bible without bias. We test all the teachings, not assume it's all correct and agreeing. Them come together and discuss the truths found in the Bible.

Many Christians are 'landlocked' into Paul's statement that all scriptures are inspired by the Holy Spirit when Jesus said nothing about such thing.

The promise of Jesus is not a book/scripture but a Spirit to guide you into all truths.

Many of Paul's teachings deny the teachings of Jesus. He is probably the antichrist 'that was already here' Jesus was referring to before he left his disciples for heaven.

Jesus warns that MANY more antichrists will come so this title is not just for one person especially one with ridiculously deep voice and makes the baphomet sign every second, no. Anyone who denies Jesus or his Father is the antichrist. It's not as simple as denying Jesus or the Father exists, but to deny their teachings is to deny them.

A lot of Christians today, are doing the exact thing, denying Jesus' teachings which they think is too radical for their lifestyles. They could not quote another one of Jesus teachings to 'refute' another one he said. But this is because Jesus doesn't change his mind. He tells similar things, similar ideas, over and over...

Anything inspired of the Holy Spirit is like puzzle fitting together perfectly, they don't contradict each other, there is no compromise. You will never hear to be 'in the world' to preach the gospel.

Back to topic

Jesus did not say anything against women, during his time, nor in the future. In fact, Mary Magdalene broke a women's law when she poured the expensive perfume over Jesus, bared her hair wiped off the excess perfume with her hair. Jesus never said anything bad (the disciples did), not even a bit, but only praises for Magdalene's incredible demonstration of her love for Jesus.

Would you mind listing all these contridiction of Paul's?

Originally posted by guitarplayer

Would you mind listing all these contridiction of Paul's?

Don't get your hopes up. I've been asking for ages, and all I get are quotes from the same old websites, all of which are just taken out of context. I've got all of the websites bookmarked, I suppose I should just save my replies so I can copy and paste, lol.

Originally posted by guitarplayer
Would you mind listing all these contridiction of Paul's?

My pleasure!

Some of the links are very long articles some are short, choose as you wish but all these are Bible-based analysis:

false-apostle-paul-archive.blogspot.co.nz...

www.voiceofjesus.org...

www.wordwiz72.com...

voiceofjesus.org...

www.jesusfamilies.org...

www.judaismvschristianity.com...

Many are saying that the "church" doesn't head the words of Paul when it comes to women "anymore." So when did that "anymore" start? In the 1970's? How many female Catholic priests are there? How many of you know a female Christian preacher? I know there are some, but they seem to be an anomaly.

Clearly, Paul's words are still very much headed, when it come to women's role in the congregation. Paul's words on homosexuality are also taken pretty seriously. When I was growing up, male hippies had long hair and our pastor preached Paul's words on the abomination of long hair on men.

Originally posted by ahnggk

Originally posted by guitarplayer
Would you mind listing all these contridiction of Paul's?

My pleasure!

Some of the links are very long articles some are short, choose as you wish but all these are Bible-based analysis:

false-apostle-paul-archive.blogspot.co.nz...

www.voiceofjesus.org...

www.wordwiz72.com...

voiceofjesus.org...

www.jesusfamilies.org...

www.judaismvschristianity.com...

See, guitarplayer, what'd I tell you? This one didn't even bother citing any, just gave you all the links

Considering that Paul lived in a time when women were considered little more than cattle, I think nothing he said was out of line for two thousand years ago. Elsewhere in the bible (OT) women are told not to adorn themselves with gold.

BTW, I thought you were were posting about Ron Paul and am glad that you weren't

reply to post by adjensen


Contradictions between Paul and Jesus HAVE been provided in the past.
What happens is that people asking to see the contradictions just glaze over the evidence and say "what contradictions"?

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by adjensen

 

Contradictions between Paul and Jesus HAVE been provided in the past.
What happens is that people asking to see the contradictions just glaze over the evidence and say "what contradictions"?

. Historical and covenant context has also been failed to be followed in the past.

A LOT. Context is step 1 of Biblical hermeneutics... that's step ONE.

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by adjensen

 

Contradictions between Paul and Jesus HAVE been provided in the past.
What happens is that people asking to see the contradictions just glaze over the evidence and say "what contradictions"?

Every one that I have been shown has been taken out of context, is inaccurate, or represents a difference of no consequence. You are welcome to provide one, as well -- an instance where Paul directly contradicts the teaching of Christ.