Debate me about the bible
To follow up:
1 Corinthians 11:3, 1 Timothy 2:12 and Ephesians 5:22ff:
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. (KJV)
But I permit not a woman to teach, nor to have dominion over a man, but to be in quietness. (ASV)
Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything. (TNIV)
Can you still claim the New Testament isn't sexist?
This same passage was already posted like 2 pages ago and you cut out the second half of it talking about the man's duties to the wife.
You guys are so eager to twist things so they fit into your worldview.
Face it, it was a very sexist time when these words were written. More sexist than today.
It says pretty clearly that women should obey their husbands. No where in the bible does it say that husbands should obey their wives.
Nowhere in either passage does it say husbands shouldn't listen to their wives and treat them as maids either.
I grant you, it orders men to be nice to their women, that's better than nothing. But there's clearly a difference in status.[/quote]
Yes, I've never said there wasn't a different. I noted the gender and marriage roles.
[color="#1C2837"]Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church[/quote]
Are you saying that Christ and his church are equals? Surely nothing is equal to the Lord. Well it's equating men to the Lord and women to his underlings, the church.[/quote]
It is providing an analogy to one of the aspects of the relationship. Let me add that though the Israelites were not equal with God. He did still listen to their pleas and provided them: freedom, their own land, a King, a Savior, and redemption.
Please, for the love of god, stop twisting the words. Accept them as somewhat sexist. I welcome your desire to disagree with the words and have a more feminist viewpoint, but have the integrity to stand up and say "I disagree with this part of the Bible" instead of pretending it says what you want it to say.
Do you even know you're doing it, or is it involuntary?
[/quote]
Ok, you disagree with my take on the passages. Nothing I can do about that, but agree to disagree. In any case, I read those passages with the knowledge that they were written in a time much different than ours. A lot of what they say still holds true to today. Hell, the US of A still today is sexist. With or without a Bible. Men still do the fighting. And women still expect a man to protect, care, and provide for her and the family. Granted it's to various degrees nowadays. For the record, yeah, I may be a little sexist too.
This same passage was already posted like 2 pages ago and you cut out the second half of it talking about the man's duties to the wife.
Sure, the husband has duties to the wife. But the husband is the head. The boss. In charge. If there is a disagreement between man and woman, the bible says the woman should obey.
Why are you being so disingenuous? It's not like you're going to trick anyone into believing the New Testament isn't sexist. Everyone can all see your charade, and yet you keep at it.
Alpha_ProgDes, cheers for having the courage and integrity to admit it's sexist. And cheers for having the courage and integrity to admit that you, too, are sexist. I don't mean that sarcastically.
You seem to believe that a wife should obey a husband as the head of the family, and you admit the Bible supports it. I see no hypocrisy there.
way2lazy2care, however, seems to be a lost cause. He chooses to misinterpret the Bible to fit his worldview.
This is the difference between religion and science. If you misinterpret facts in science, you're labeled a bad scientist. If you purposefully misinterpret facts in religion, however, you have a good chance of becoming a multimillionaire preacher.
[quote name='way2lazy2care' timestamp='1307640434' post='4821392']
This same passage was already posted like 2 pages ago and you cut out the second half of it talking about the man's duties to the wife.
Sure, the husband has duties to the wife. But the husband is the head. The boss. In charge. If there is a disagreement between man and woman, the bible says the woman should obey.[/quote]
This is my issue with your argument. Yes, the man has the last word. That doesn't mean that the woman's words aren't taken into consideration or ignored outright. He takes the lead ultimately. True. But the dynamic is not black and white and woman getting pwned all the time just for being a woman. She does have a voice, sway, and power in the relationship. I guess I'm not liking the fallacious implication(s) your posts have been exuding.
This is my issue with your argument. Yes, the man has the last word. That doesn't mean that the woman's words aren't taken into consideration or ignored outright. He takes the lead ultimately. True. But the dynamic is not black and white and woman getting pwned all the time just for being a woman. She does have a voice, sway, and power in the relationship. I guess I'm not liking the fallacious implication(s) your posts have been exuding.
Show me one "fallacious implication." All I ever implied is that the New Testament is sexist by asserting that men should be the head of the family and that women should be subordinate. I never said that the Bible says women are never to be taken into consideration or ignored outright. I certainly never said the woman gets "pwned all the time." You imagined that.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
