The Persecution of Women in the Church

[Carpenter]

Everytime I believe I know and understand the role of the woman, she goes and does something that changes my mind and shakes my foundation.

"...cmere cmere cmere, OH getaway, getaway, getaway..."

[Sister Alvear]

Down through the eons and ages there has been a special warfare that has been focused on woman. We see her in her beginning in Gen. 2:23 she was called Isha because she was taken out of man. In Gen. 3:20 her husband called her Eve, the mother of all living or life giver. From the point of her beginning to this point woman was no longer taken out of man but man was born of woman. Eve, the wife of the first man Adam along with him failed the test. But we can see a spiritual order of things in the natural order of things. What was lost in the first man Adam was regained in the second man Adam. It has been well said that man was made in the image of God and failed miserably but in the fullness of time God was made in the likeness of man and triumphed gloriously.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by The Mrs

Now see...here's the fine line.

If I say one thing, I'm considered THIS...

If I say another thing, I'm considered THAT...

I understand the proper role of a woman, and how and what God created her to be...but what I'm looking at here is the traditional 'global' treatment of women throughout the ages. This was what I was seeing at the beginning of the thread...there are things in the bible, examples of living and lives, that ARE culturally related. God did NOT ordain them.

SOME OF THESE THINGS have faded away...but not all.

Neither in our culture, nor others.

Where does the 'church' stand now? Are we totally free of the denigration/persecution/second-class treatment of women?

Why answer the question when we can marginalize those that bring the question?

Unless Elder Coonskinner is advocating that it is God-ordained that woman should call their husbands "lord" or "master"

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by The Mrs

Now see...here's the fine line.

If I say one thing, I'm considered THIS...

If I say another thing, I'm considered THAT...

I understand the proper role of a woman, and how and what God created her to be...but what I'm looking at here is the traditional 'global' treatment of women throughout the ages. This was what I was seeing at the beginning of the thread...there are things in the bible, examples of living and lives, that ARE culturally related. God did NOT ordain them.

SOME OF THESE THINGS have faded away...but not all.

Neither in our culture, nor others.

Where does the 'church' stand now? Are we totally free of the denigration/persecution/second-class treatment of women?

Is every church, every pastor, every saint, perfect and flawless?

Of course not. Flesh is flesh.

But what I seem to be picking up from ourgood buddy here is that the Bible itself promotes what he considers the oppression and persecution of women.

His derogatory mention of Peter's Sarah reference is just one example.

As for the Lord, his way is perfect.

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Why answer the question when we can marginalize those that bring the question?

Unless Elder Coonskinner is advocating that it is God-ordained that woman should call their husbands "lord" or "master"

I am advocating that God commended a submissive woman.

That does not mean every woman should address her husband by that title.

But to say that it was the result of an age-old spirit of denigration is to disrespect the eternal Word of God.

How can you so easily ignore this man's attitude toward the Bible?

It is difficult to discuss Scripture with a dude who doesn't even believe it.

That is germane to this discussion.

[The Mrs]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

I am advocating that God commended a submissive woman.

That does not mean every woman should address her husband by that title.

But to say that it was the result of an age-old spirit of denigration is to disrespect the eternal Word of God.

How can you so easily ignore this man's attitude toward the Bible?

It is difficult to discuss Scripture with a dude who doesn't even believe it.

That is germane to this discussion.

I still believe you were too quick to judge him, and you both were misunderstanding each other's intents.

I understood BOTH of your points of view...and they were both DIFFERENT.

I think he was trying to point out the exact thing that I just got done pointing out. There are examples in the bible of women being treated as second-class citizens...but that doesn't make it God ordained, or right.

There were CULTURAL examples...ones we don't follow today.

CH has stated that the bible is the inspired Word of God, and is infallible. You asked him some pointed questions that I believe he didn't answer because he doesn't HAVE to answer to you. But that's just a guess on my part.

He thought you were coming across pretty strongly...maybe you two got off on the wrong foot.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Coonskinner

I am advocating that God commended a submissive woman.

That does not mean every woman should address her husband by that title.

But to say that it was the result of an age-old spirit of denigration is to disrespect the eternal Word of God.

How can you so easily ignore this man's attitude toward the Bible?

It is difficult to discuss Scripture with a dude who doesn't even believe it.

That is germane to this discussion.

Who has question submissiveness, Elder? At the heart of the matter is how culture and history is often meshed w/ God's commandments.

Does one have to be Apostolic to have an intelligent discussion around here without being labeled, attacked or marginalized?

[SDG]

Originally Posted by The Mrs

I still believe you were too quick to judge him, and you both were misunderstanding each other's intents.

I understood BOTH of your points of view...and they were both DIFFERENT.

I think he was trying to point out the exact thing that I just got done pointing out. There are examples in the bible of women being treated as second-class citizens...but that doesn't make it God ordained, or right.

There were CULTURAL examples...ones we don't follow today.

CH has stated that the bible is the inspired Word of God, and is infallible. You asked him some pointed questions that I believe he didn't answer because he doesn't HAVE to answer to you. But that's just a guess on my part.

He thought you were coming across pretty strongly...maybe you two got off on the wrong foot.

Yep. .... and Why do we have put a "spirit" into his posting? Must we accept the Elder's discernment? He seems to be playing to us "folks".

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by The Mrs

I still believe you were too quick to judge him, and you both were misunderstanding each other's intents.

I understood BOTH of your points of view...and they were both DIFFERENT.

I think he was trying to point out the exact thing that I just got done pointing out. There are examples in the bible of women being treated as second-class citizens...but that doesn't make it God ordained, or right.

There were CULTURAL examples...ones we don't follow today.

CH has stated that the bible is the inspired Word of God, and is infallible. You asked him some pointed questions that I believe he didn't answer because he doesn't HAVE to answer to you. But that's just a guess on my part.

He thought you were coming across pretty strongly...maybe you two got off on the wrong foot.

He did not state that the Bible is the infallible Word of God.

Fine distinction there.

He denies parts of the Scripture.

You can't have it both ways.

[Coonskinner]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Who has question submissiveness, Elder? At the heart of the matter is how culture and history is often meshed w/ God's commandments.

Does one have to be Apostolic to have an intelligent discussion around here without being labeled, attacked or marginalized?

When portions of his argument depend on a preumption of error in the Scripture, it is relevant to discuss.