[Athos]

Saying that women are not to exercise authority over men is a million miles from saying that all women are subject to all men.

I didn't say that - I merely stated what your reference said.

Saying that the husband is to love his wife is NOT the same thing as saying he should love ALL wives. Saying that women cannot exercise authority over men in the church is NOT the same thing as saying that all men have authority over all women.

The quote is not about love but refers to authority. It contains no modifiers. If you wish to make it mean something other than what the words mean, that's fine with me.

I assure you the Bible can respond. Try reading it. It defends and explains itself quite well.

You are referring to INTERPRETING the Bible, not the ability of the Bible to respond - unless you have a talking Bible. You continue to have difficulty with words and their meaning.

[jlisenbe]

I merely stated what your reference said.

No, you did not. You stated your own silly opinion that the text gave all men authority over all women. Any competent second grader could read the passage and tell it did not, in any form, say that.

The quote is not about love but refers to authority. It contains no modifiers. If you wish to make it mean something other than what the words mean, that's fine with me.

Like I said, sometimes you have to think a little. It was stated as an illustration.

You are referring to INTERPRETING the Bible, not the ability of the Bible to respond - unless you have a talking Bible. You continue to have difficulty with words and their meaning.

The Bible does speak, but only to those willing to listen. It might be that you are not included in that group.

[Wondergirl]

[Athos said] the text gave all men authority over all women. Any competent second grader could read the passage and tell it did not, in any form, say that.

It's very simple. I just go with what the text says. Women are not to teach or exercise authority over men. It does not say that women, as a group, are subjugated to men.

What???? This must be why there are legions of Christian denominations.

[waltero]

Why do you believe that love and selflessness are good?

Man has free will. He can choose to be loving and unselfish. He doesn't need religion and a moral code for that.

I think that is the point. If there is a God (or even gods/creators), would they not imbue or at least have impacted us with some essence of themselves (moral code)?

Where there is no honor of God, a society will fail to respect His creation, and people will suffer as a result.

What does that have to do with a draft dodging morally befreft individual sending my kids to die in a war that brings him personal gain?

Let me think about that one.

@ATHOS

The hate is all yours. You are projecting, my friend.

We are often influenced by our Love, or our Hatred, before we are aware of it our selves.

a. 1 Tim. 2:12. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man.

Does than mean I shouldn't listen to a woman who teaches? I consider it something between God and women. Just the same as Tithing. God says we must pay tithes...has nothing to do with me if you Don't tithe.

[jlisenbe]

Does than mean I shouldn't listen to a woman who teaches?

I think it means exactly what it says, that Paul did not allow women to teach or exercise authority over men, probably meaning that he did not allow women to be what we would refer to as lead or senior pastors. Now did Peter or John allow this? That is possible, but it is not addressed anywhere in the NT that I know of. I do not want to be the one arguing with Paul on this issue, but others no doubt do not feel the same way.

But very plainly it does not state that all men have authority over all women, and to say that it implies that is, I would think, an enormous stretch.

[talaniman]

What does any of that have to do with the dufus selling nukes to the Saudis over the objection of the congress? Opinions and debate is great but pales in real applications. Do you think the dufus listens to the bible? I give you this JL, you have turned the other cheek to a lies of the dufus and his antics, because he delivered to you two of three things you deem important?

Current conditions and events warrant a more practical approach than the writings of ancients which may, or may not be the word of god, when it comes to picking our leaders. Sorry I cannot take their word for it that half of humanities voices should be discounted, and contributions forbidden.

That's crazy and one would hope we have evolved past this man domination stuff, but I guess we have not...some of us any way.

[waltero]

1 Tim. 2:12. I do not permit a woman to teach

Some understand it to mean; I will not listen to a woman while she is speaking behind the pulpit.

[jlisenbe]

I give you this JL, you have turned the other cheek to a lies of the dufus and his antics, because he delivered to you two of three things you deem important?

What caused you to turn the cheek to the lies of Mr. Obama? What did he deliver for you?

Current conditions and events warrant a more practical approach than the writings of ancients which may, or may not be the word of god, when it comes to picking our leaders.

Such as?

Sorry I cannot take their word for it that half of humanities voices should be discounted, and contributions forbidden.

What are you talking about?

Some understand it to mean; I will not listen to a woman while she is speaking behind the pulpit.

And they are entitled to that understanding, but it would not be proper at all to say that the text says that because it does not.

[Wondergirl]

Tal: Sorry I cannot take their word for it that half of humanities voices should be discounted, and contributions forbidden.

JL :What are you talking about?

"Half of humanities voices ... and contributions" = women's voices and contributions

[jlisenbe]

"Half of humanities voices ... and contributions" = women's voices and contributions

Got it. Just call me dense. However, I think the world's women would be amazed to find out that they are not able to raise their voice or contribute to humanity without being a senior pastor or exclusively hold a position of authority over men in the church. I think they would say that is decidedly not true.

[Wondergirl]

I think the world's women would be amazed to find out that they are not able to raise their voice or contribute to humanity without being a senior pastor or exclusively hold a position of authority over men in the church. I think they would say that is decidedly not true.

Please rewrite this as several simple sentences without the negatives. I have no idea what you're saying.

[jlisenbe]

However, I think the world's women would be amazed to find out that they must be a senior pastor or be able to exercise authority over men in order to raise their voice or contribute to humanity. I think they believe otherwise and have, in fact, done otherwise.

Better??

[Wondergirl]

However, I think the world's women would be amazed to find out that they must be a senior pastor or be able to exercise authority over men in order to raise their voice or contribute to humanity. I think they believe otherwise and have, in fact, done otherwise.

Better??

Nope. Maybe Athos or Tal can figure it out. All I'm reading is that we women must be a senior pastor if we want to have authority over men or contribute to society.

[Athos]

I think it means exactly what it says, that Paul did not allow women to teach or exercise authority over men, probably meaning that he did not allow women to be what we would refer to as lead or senior pastors

In one sentence you have contradicted yourself. Does it mean EXACTLY what it says or does it mean what you PROBABLY claim it means? It can't be both exactly AND not exactly (probably).

I do not want to be the one arguing with Paul on this issue

Ergo, you agree with Paul. The more you write, the more you reveal yourself in little ways.

But very plainly it does not state that all men have authority over all women, and to say that it implies that is, I would think, an enormous stretch.

Those are your words.

[paraclete]

argument for the sake of argument

[Wondergirl]

argument for the sake of argument

No. I don't understand what he said -- and meant. Do you?

[paraclete]

No. I don't understand what he said -- and meant. Do you?

Yes he is saying women can contribute without being in senior positions, and do. Women have influence however you find that their perspective is oriented to women and may not cover the entire spectrum. I find when women preach they go into too much detail, too much justification of their position. We have a debate about insufficient women in senior positions as if they are entitled to a quota of 50%, but the reality is they don't offer themselves and many who do, don't have the ability, so when you have a quota, you get incompetence. This is not to say there are not incompetent men, however, they tend to be weeded out earlier.

[jlisenbe]

Yes he is saying women can contribute without being in senior positions, and do

Very nice summation. I would only add that the Timothy passage refers to the church and not to the world in general. Merit should be the determining factor.

In one sentence you have contradicted yourself. Does it mean EXACTLY what it says or does it mean what you PROBABLY claim it means? It can't be both exactly AND not exactly (probably).

In most Bible passages you find the explicit meaning, and then you determine an application. That is what I have done, and that is why I used the word "probably" to indicate that it is my opinion and not the explicit reading of the text. There is no contradiction.

Ergo, you agree with Paul. The more you write, the more you reveal yourself in little ways.

It's beyond even that. I agree with the text of the Bible and regard it as God's word, so it is not my place, or this culture's place, to judge it. The day will come when we will be judged by its content. The more you write, the more you reveal you do not have a high regard for the Bible.

[talaniman]

Who cares who controls the pulpit of your church, but I would rather focus on who's the best qualified for public office and can deliver on the basics of good governance. Gender makes no difference. The dufus in the WH has made the case that conservatives have lost their freaking minds.

[jlisenbe]

conservatives have lost their freaking minds.

Yep. Record low unemployment is a sure sign of insanity. Trump managed to do in about eighteen months what Obama could not do in 96 months. We could use some more of that craziness.

The sad part of this deal is that the dems in congress are so intent on trying to impeach Trump for anything they can make up, they are not dealing with serious issues. Social Security will be in the red within ten or fifteen years. Not talked about. We continue to run ridiculous deficits. Don't hear about it. Medical costs continue to skyrocket. Not talked about. I found a receipt yesterday where my grandmother spent five days in the hospital in 1949. Cost? 89 dollars TOTAL. Now it would be a thousand times that. These are the things we should be addressing. Instead, we talk about supposed collusion with the Russkies. Pitiful, and it is not much better for the repubs who still control the senate but propose and do next to nothing.

focus on who's the best qualified for public office and can deliver on the basics of good governance.

I would agree completely with that.