|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Define faith? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Christians also opposed voting rights for women, opposed women's right to work outside the home, and opposed their right to be educated and practice in male-dominated fields. (In fact, some still do this today) Christians also opposed the Emancipation Proclamation, opposed the underground railroad, supported slavery, gave up jews to the Nazis, and supported Hitler for the whole war. Christian history is diverse, containing both good and bad. However, in this thread, I am responding very specifically to claims about marriage and the role of women, made first by TB, and now by others. TB said "Democratic equality is not the seed of identity that God births into women." in message #32. Change the word "woman" in that sentence to "negro" or "colored" and you get something that sounds like an excerpt from a speech by Strom Thurmond. Sure sounds like religiously-justified oppression to me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
zipzip Inactive Member |
TB justification may be religiously based, but it is not Biblically based. In Genesis, Eve was taken from the side of Adam -- not his head or foot -- symbolic of her equality and importance. Likewise throughout the OT and NT, there are female figures upon which the whole history of the Jewish people hinged. Even Christ's ministry was begun through an interaction with a woman. Women have been important figures in the Christian church since its beginning.
As for people claiming to be Christians, then discarding Christ's teaching and doing evil things -- I think the claim can be reasonably made that these people are not "little Christs". The abolition movement was based on the teachings of Christ. The underground railroad was formed by people who took Christ seriously. The Nazis were a violently pagan political party/cult who abhorred Christianity, jailing and murdering those who spoke out against them. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was one of these Christians. Compare that with the statistics of atheism/agnosticism --> how many millions dead in the past century? Lets count the ways ... Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, numerous African regimes... Somewhere near 1 billion murdered. This is what "scientific rationalism" and atheism brings.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Was that at the same time they were considered chattel or after? Look, I hear you on your particular interpretation of the role of women in Christianity and marriage, but if you disagree with TB's interpretation, then your argument is with him. That's why religion is able to be used to justify anything; the people who are able to convince large numbers of other people that their particular version of things is the "correct" version get to tell everybody else who the "real" Christians are.
quote: I know some pagans who would bristle at that implication. mmmm, there was a lot of Christianity and talk of "doing God's work" put out there by Hitler and the Nazis, although it was probably meant to manipulate more than anything.
quote: I thought you said that the Nazis were pagan, not athiests? I don't think you can be both at the same time, so which is it? The rest of your comparison is pure rubbish. How many people have been killed in the name of religion, or justified through religion? The Crusades, Ireland, Israel/Palesine, Ancient Rome and Greece, The Balkans, etc. etc. We can count several thousand on 9/11 alone. This kind of killing has been going on for centuries and is no different from the killings perpetrated by Hitler, Pol Pot, Castro, and all the others you mention. They are done in the name of one group feeling superior to another and deciding that the other group must be destroyed or converted. Every single time some religious person does some horible act in the name of her God or religion, a bunch of others who share that religion say, "but they aren't 'real' *insert religion here*." This excuse has been used to handwave away thousands of years of oppression and brutality performed in the name of religion, and it continues today. I really don't think you want to try to compare history, because religion comes out looking pretty bad. Religion thrived in the Dark Ages, and that should tell you something.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
Schraf
However, if what you are saying is that God likes it that women submit to men in all things, well, then to me you are saying that God likes women to be kept without full adult standing in society. But men are to sumbit to men so therefore we neither have 'full adult' standing in your view (of my view!). I don't want any rights above what God wants to give me! I (now) prefer reflecting my career/life decisions to other men and willingly weighing their advice. I'm convinced this is how life is meant to be. You may like the modern view of every family locked away in its castle. I hate that way now. I open my life to those I am accountable too. We open the upbringing of our children to our entire home Bible study group. I have been taken aside by others and had harsh things said to me for the good of my children:
Zech 13:6 If someone asks him, 'What are these wounds on your body [2] ?' he will answer, 'The wounds I was given at the house of my friends'. No-one is forcing anyone to do it! We have had the occasional wife leaving a husband on the issue. That is sad but a reality. We have had men moving to other churches. That is sad too but reality. Christ wept tears of blood over his call.
It really can't be spun in any way that makes it palatable. Agreed until God opens our eyes to an even bigger world than we imagine in my experience.
Isn't it possible that this part of the Bible, like the parts about the monetary value of slaves and women, is just a cultural artifact from the days when women were considered less valuable than a cow, and that they are not relevant today? It's possible but not consistent with the theme of Christ and his bride, the church or the manner in which I believe God is healing family relationships on this planet in my community. Families in the west are in a terrible state. Children do not respect parents (for good reason). They grow up unteachable and insecuare and a significant amount enter into crime drugs and unhealthy consideration for the opposite sex. Society is a mess but the book of Malachi promises that one day 'the hearts of the fathers will turn to the children and the the hearts of the children will turn to the fathers'. That is what we believe the current move of God is and that the refomation of families and families of families is the way it will happen. [This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 02-02-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: hmmm. "Weighing their advice" doesn't sound like "submitting" to me. It sounds like you are still ultimately making your own descision after seeking counsel.
quote: Huh? When did I say or imply that I liked that?
quote: But, ultimately, the decision on what to do is still yours. There is a big difference between asking for and/or receiving advice, however harsh, and submitting to the will of another adult. [This message has been edited by schrafinator, 02-02-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
funkmasterfreaky Inactive Member |
schraf, I can definately see why this topic on Christian marriages makes no sense to you.
Please take this in to mind (if you haven't already), my wife is trusting that I am submitting to God. Trusting that I am trying to listen to the Holy Spirit and follow God's guidance on our lives. So she is ultimately submitting to God. Which is a heavy thought to me as a husband, as I am now accountable to God to make the right decisions for us. In your case however, if you are submitting, it is submission to a man's will. Which I don't like the sound of either. So in the context of a Christian marriage, I don't see a problem with the scripture pertaining to submission in a marriage. It is not a heiarchy (sp?) of the sexes. ------------------Saved by an incredible Grace.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
Why doesn't God want to talk to your wife? Doesn't he think she can understand him, or what?
And sorry, I really don't think you can separate submission and hierarchy. It goes like this, right?; GodMales Male children Females female children OK, that's pretty OT. How about this for a modern version: GodMales Females Children Oh, and was I right? In the event that you and your wife have a disagreement, you always win?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
Schraf
Whether man or woman, submission is a weighing up. Everyone has the dignity of their own response. Sometimes advice is advice and sometimes advice is direction. It is up to the listener, whether man or woman, to respond appropriately. That is the difference between an adult Christian relationship and a child-like one. A child (of certain age) has no choice (but is age appropriately parented). An adult submits of their own free will. [This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 02-03-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
funkmasterfreaky Inactive Member |
You looked further into my post than you should have. In doing so drew faulty conclusions and missed the point.
Did I say God doesn't communicate with my wife? No I didn't. In the event that my wife and I cannot agree on a decision, yes the decision falls on my shoulders. A point at which I must be very careful, and spend more time in prayer, in case God is trying to speak to me through my wife. If my wife is so opposed to a decision there must be a reason, right? Here's the proper heiarchy, Godus ------------------Saved by an incredible Grace. [This message has been edited by funkmasterfreaky, 02-03-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
zipzip Inactive Member |
I think you are wrong. Religion is found if every human society, or at least has been until recently. Correlating atrocities with religion in that context is about as worthwhile as correlating it with grammatical language.
However, enforced atheistic societies are relatively new, so you can compare their fruit with what has gone on before --> brutal repression and murder in scale that has never, ever been seen before on the face of the planet. Lenin, Stalin, and Mao alone murdered 150 million people in the name of atheism. This is equivalent to the entire population of the world at the time of Christ.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: OK, let me see if I understand. Your wife has to listen to your direction and/or advice, because that's the way God wants it. You don't neccessarily have to listen to you wife's advice, and she isn't supposed to direct you at all, because that's the way God wants it. I am doing my best to make sense of what you are saying.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
shilohproject Inactive Member |
Hey zip,
My take on all this violence and "inhumanity to man" is this: it is simply a condition of humanity, found in all belief environments, Christian, athiest, Muslim, or otherwise. A recognized "faith" seems to mean absolutly nothing on a cultural scale. It was good so-called Christian folks, commissioned to convert the "heathen" of the New World, who wiped them out by the force of improved weaponry (Aztec), or small pox infected blankets (American Indians), etc., etc. There are many examples of good conduct also, but that too is found across faith lines and must include Muslims, Buddhists, and atheists, as well as Christians. -Shiloh
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: mmm, it was a pretty direct implication, I thought, but no matter.
quote: Why, if she is in communication with God, too?
quote: Why would he be doing that? Why wouldn't he just tell you both the same thing? I'm not being flip here.
quote: Well, yes, but why not make the decision on what to do together instead of going away, having a man-to-man with God, and then coming back and telling her what the two of you decided?
quote: If that's the case, then you really aren't the head of your family, and you two are equal partners, each able to talk to God and both of you making descisions together, and working through disagreements together. If you are the head of your family, then it has to be: GodMan Woman In this scenario, when the two of you have disagreements, and because you have this apparent especially clear communication with God that is not bestowed upon your wife, you always win.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2170 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
OK, fine, you win.
All religious people everywhere have always been extra good (except for the people who aren't/weren't "real" *insert religion here*) Of course, we only get to decide who the "not-real" religious people are well after they do something evil in the name of their God, firmly believing all the while that they are doing God's will. All non-believers everywhere are evil murderers. Yep, that's reality for sure. Christians and the Moors had to ride on horseback to go kill the heathens, while Mao and Stalin had greater killing technology. That makes the Christian and Moor atrocities that much better, it's true. When you feel like addressing the points and examples I provide, let me know.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tranquility Base Inactive Member |
Schraf
The wife fascilitates the direction of the husband putting her uniqueness and talents into it and at times she may be crucial in advising a complete change in direction. (The Lord told Abraham 'listen to your wife'). But, yes, she is not democratic joint-head of the family.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024