The Persecution of Women in the Church

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Man this is as dangerous as it gets....families don't need a man. All they need is a woman. Sure. Satan won't try to destroy the man cuz if you want to hurt the family you need to get the woman, not the lowly male. This whole thread ends up being reverse discrimination in disguise!

Satan is after EVERYONE. HE destroys families by working on men and women and teens.

The problem with this thread is it is full of a lot of unfounded assertions geared to stroke the ego of the liberal feminists AND it is very very very unbalanced presenting women as the only pillar in a family satan would want to try to attack and that only women are "persecuted" by men (btw women can be just as evil towards men) and not rather men and women both are corrupt humanity and take advantage over others and that this is the church persecuting women

Prax,

You amaze me. I didn't mean or allude to the assertion you made that families don't need men. Doggoneit Prax...I think just the oposite than that. I will even concede to the fact I need one.

The fact is, in or out of the church, the women by nature are nurturers even of their husbands. And if the woman folds, a man just finds another woman to take her spot because it is very difficult for men and children to survive without a Mom and a wife. But our country is made up of primarily single parent families; women with children & at poverty level. Women and children SURVIVE but just barely.

If you are insinuating that I am a liberal feminist you are out of your ever lovin' mind. My prayer and desire is that our churches be filled with healthy families with a two parent home and a Father that loves his wife, the mother of his children, and children that have respect and honor their parents. It comes from the head down. If the head is dysfunctional then the whole body/family is dysfunctional.

God give us men who don't abuse their position and who cover their families financially, spiritually, and will die for their family's protection.

Sincerely, Rhoni

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by ILG

There are three subjects going on here and they seem to be crossing ways.

1. Abuse of women by sexual and physical abuse.

2. Blatant oppression of women.

3. Subtle oppression of women by tradition.

Most in the church are not experiencing 1 or 2. Some are. No one will deny this needs to be dealt with when it exists. It's number three that people argue whether it exists or not for the most part.

Good summarization ILG:sshhh

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

Good summarization ILG:sshhh

Thanks.

When one person says "Women are sometimes sexually abused in the church!!"

And the next quotes that and says "Women are not oppressed just because they can't wear pants!!"

One wonders if anyone is listening.

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by ILG

Thanks.

When one person says "Women are sometimes sexually abused in the church!!"

And the next quotes that and says "Women are not oppressed just because they can't wear pants!!"

One wonders if anyone is listening.

Isn't that the truth!

Blessings, Rhoni

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Another post that reflects a policeman and pharisee-saturated attitude.

Some of us are wearisome that a handful believe that this forum is a church... that we must somehow submit the the spiritual authority of overseers and their twisted view of TRUTH.

You are only sweet to those that agree w/ you. When they somehow challenge your dogma the Coondog comes out.

Forums are places of discussion ... a place to opine ... not shrines that agree w/ you and ... be submitted to a barrage of Inquisition-like castigations.

Your weak attempts to somehow monopolize the term Apostolic is just that a feeble attempt.

The predictable devices to define and pigeon-hole CrazyH are only based on the perceptions of a shrinking minority....

Yet you continue to marginalize and attack him even when he said things to the contrary.

CrazyH, spoke in general terms about a subject that should be important to all of us .... the priesthood of all believers. I submit CrazyH is as Apostolic as the rest of us.

I must admit, however, that I enjoy seeing you post in the typical dogmatic, duplicitous, reactionary mode .... because well .... at least your posting.

Another post that reflects a policeman and pharisee-saturated attitude.

You often make this policeman accusation; I am not a moderator here, just a poster. But your loathing for the "policeman" reflects an attitude Paul mentioned:

Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Rom 13:2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
Rom 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: Rom 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

Some of us are wearisome that a handful believe that this forum is a church... that we must somehow submit the the spiritual authority of overseers and their twisted view of TRUTH.

Believe me, I know this is no church. And I would like to ask you to point out the post where I have ever, even once, attempted to get someone to submit to me as a spiritual authority. It isn't here. A false and baseless accusation.

This is a forum, however, and it does have rules. One of those rules deals with the prohibiting of promoting false doctrine, such as the idea that the Bible is not the infallible Word of God. If you don't like the rules, tough luck. I don't like some of them, but I follow them if I want to remain a poster here. Others have to do the same.

You are only sweet to those that agree w/ you. When they somehow challenge your dogma the Coondog comes out.

Another false and baseless accusation. I could list a number of posters that I don't agree with very much, but have a friendly relationship with. CC1, Reformed Dave, Felicity, ILG, Heavenly One, Pianoman, Maple Leaf, Rico, and the list goes on. Nice attempt to categorize to marginalize there.

The predictable devices to define and pigeon-hole CrazyH are only based on the perceptions of a shrinking minority....

Yet you continue to marginalize and attack him even when he said things to the contrary.

Daniel, his views about the canon of Scripture are in every way relevant to the discussion. They also put him in violation of the rules of the forum when he started promoting them. Why on earth do you want to defend something so far outside truth and right-thinking? Eroding away at the very Scripture itself? That is a new low in associations for you, Dan. Think about that, Brother. You don't want to go there.

I must admit, however, that I enjoy seeing you post in the typical dogmatic, duplicitous, reactionary mode .... because well .... at least your posting.

Daniel, dogmatic and reactionary are fine, because they are subjective terms.

But duplicitous?

This is the second time on this thread that you have questioned my honesty, and that is a character attack. I have a policy of never reporting posts where I am attacked. I will rarely report a post where someone else is, but not myself. And this time will be no exception.

But I do want to point out for the sake of others who may be reading our little tussle here that you will stoop to this level. I am not upset because I know the facts, and I have not been dishonest or just used "rhetoric" as you said earlier.

But anyway, there it is.

Have a great day.

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

You often make this policeman accusation; I am not a moderator here, just a poster. But your loathing for the "policeman" reflects an attitude Paul mentioned:

Rom 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Rom 13:2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
Rom 13:3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: Rom 13:4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.



Believe me, I know this is no church. And I would like to ask you to point out the post where I have ever, even once, attempted to get someone to submit to me as a spiritual authority. It isn't here. A false and baseless accusation.

This is a forum, however, and it does have rules. One of those rules deals with the prohibiting of promoting false doctrine, such as the idea that the Bible is not the infallible Word of God. If you don't like the rules, tough luck. I don't like some of them, but I follow them if I want to remain a poster here. Others have to do the same.




Another false and baseless accusation. I could list a number of posters that I don't agree with very much, but have a friendly relationship with. CC1, Reformed Dave, Felicity, ILG, Heavenly One, Pianoman, Maple Leaf, Rico, and the list goes on. Nice attempt to categorize to marginalize there.




Daniel, his views about the canon of Scripture are in every way relevant to the discussion. They also put him in violation of the rules of the forum when he started promoting them. Why on earth do you want to defend something so far outside truth and right-thinking? Eroding away at the very Scripture itself? That is a new low in associations for you, Dan. Think about that, Brother. You don't want to go there.




Daniel, dogmatic and reactionary are fine, because they are subjective terms.

But duplicitous?

This is the second time on this thread that you have questioned my honesty, and that is a character attack. I have a policy of never reporting posts where I am attacked. I will rarely report a post where someone else is, but not myself. And this time will be no exception.

But I do want to point out for the sake of others who may be reading our little tussle here that you will stoop to this level. I am not upset because I know the facts, and I have not been dishonest or just used "rhetoric" as you said earlier.

But anyway, there it is.

Have a great day.

CS, Being a victim doesn't suit you...so don't even try that trump card. Besides, that is my trump card if your allegations about me are correct...which they aren't then I already own it.

[Coonskinner]

Victim?

You totally missed the point, Sister.

That will be the day.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Newman

Praxeas-

1. Do you disagree with the statement "The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world"?

2. How many families do you know that are in church if the mother isn't? How many are in church if the father isn't?


This isn't to say that women are more powerful; but recognizing that there seems to be some patterns...

Hey, maybe its all about who cooks supper and not about gender! But let's talk about it instead of accusing each side of discrimination.

Thank you, Newman!! Good post and good questions...I'll take a stab at these...

1. Do you disagree with the statement "The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world"? Yes, I do...Abraham Lincoln said, "All that I am, or hope to be, I owe to my mother."

Moses learned who he was and who the God of glory was at an early age, and when he was grown, refused to be called the son of Pharoahs daughter.

This does NOT mean that men don't have a role to play or a voice...heaven forbid!! God ordained for the home to be a man and a woman, however, life tells us sometimes one or the other is absent from this scene, OR unable or unwilling to fulfill their rightful position.

2. How many families do you know that are in church if the mother isn't? How many are in church if the father isn't? It is just a fact that Sanctified churches are overrun with women, especially in the Black community, of which I am quite familiar.

It happens, sure, that fathers are saved and mothers are not, but for some reason unknown to this uneducated poster it tends to be the women who are in the majority in these cases.

There are patterns indeed, and those more in tune with things may expound to a greater degree.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

Another false and baseless accusation. I could list a number of posters that I don't agree with very much, but have a friendly relationship with. CC1, Reformed Dave, Felicity, ILG, Heavenly One, Pianoman, Maple Leaf, Rico, and the list goes on. Nice attempt to categorize to marginalize there.

Me, me, me too, don't forget me!

[Barb]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

Me, me, me too, don't forget me!

LOL!! Hon, he sometimes even disagrees with ME!! How can anyone disagree with me as loveable as I am?!