| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 978.2 | | CSC32::J_CHRISTIE | Crossfire | Sun Sep 25 1994 00:31 | 12 |
| .1 You also forgot...
aa.) Married women were not to decline sex with their husbands.
bb.) Women were not to admit actually enjoying sex.
bb.) Women were prohibited from teaching the men of the church.
cc.) Women were prohibited from holding office in church outside
the women's organization.
You've been a busy man today, Greg.
Richard
|
| 978.3 | | SUBURB::ODONNELLJ | Julie O'Donnell | Mon Sep 26 1994 07:10 | 8 |
| Our Prime Minister suggested that we should all return to Victorian
values and there is the "Back to Basics" campaign for decency and
morality that was preached for a time.
The Government was then hit with one sex scandal after another... :-)
May I also point out that two of the greatest monarchs in the history
of Britain were women?
|
| 978.4 | | BIGQ::SILVA | Memories..... | Mon Sep 26 1994 12:01 | 9 |
|
Gee Greg, I hope you were only kidding about .0. That would be horrible
if we ever went back to that. I kind of like having women be themselves and not
servants.
Glen
|
| 978.5 | | SUBURB::ODONNELLJ | Julie O'Donnell | Mon Sep 26 1994 14:06 | 16 |
| Of course, if we ladies were to adopt Victorian values, we would expect
the gentlemen to follow suit.
As the holder of the purse, the gentleman got to pay for EVERYTHING.
He was expected to be gentlemanly at all times, sober, correct,
well-dressed (none of this jeans and t-shirt stuff). Gentlemen were
also expected to wear hats, but had to remove them as a mark of
respect, ie in Church and they wore gloves, too.
Ladies needed looking after. Duels were often fought (doesn't this get
better as I go on?!). Ladies were to be treated with respect and honour
(I like that one!).
Courtship - now that was fun! I'm doing a course on the Victorians at
the moment and we were reading an extract from a loveletter. The couple
were about to marry. The author was fantasising about their wedding
night and how she would lay her head on his breast and they would read
psalms and pray together.
The marriage was consummated 5 weeks later...
|
| 978.6 | | BIGQ::SILVA | Memories..... | Mon Sep 26 1994 14:13 | 4 |
|
Julie, does that make up for all the bad stuff that went along with it?
|
| 978.8 | | GRIM::MESSENGER | Bob Messenger | Mon Sep 26 1994 14:47 | 11 |
| Re: .7 Greg
> There are some strange parodies.
Mrs. Malaprop was pre-Victorian, right? :-) I think you meant "paradoxes".
Yeah, I know, take it to JOYOFLEX....
-- Bob
|
| 978.10 | | BIGQ::SILVA | Memories..... | Mon Sep 26 1994 16:41 | 78 |
| | <<< Note 978.7 by YIELD::GRIFFIS >>>
| I am thinking about it. Perhaps, women should be allowed to drink Pepsi and
| Coca-Cola, ( but get shut off after two caffeinated beverages ).
What if they drank decaf to begin with? :-)
| But... what is wrong with being a servant? I don't mind scrubbing floors,
| washing windows, or doing dishes if I know that I am ministering to the needs
| of someone else.
Greg, there is a difference between someone, like yourself, not minding
being a servant. But you want to make all women servants, don't you? And is
there a difference between making women do the things you talked about and
ministering to the needs of another? One is forced, isn't it?
Another reason why I wouldn't want to see women in that role IF THEY
DIDN'T WANT TO BE, is a marriage is something where you minister to each other,
not she to you. A 50/50 thing, where both help out, both minister to
themselves, each other, and to the rest of the family (if they have kids).
| Didn't you know? He that would be greatest among you must become the servant
| of all?!! I think it would help if people took on the attitude of a servant.
Didn't .0 only refer to women though Greg? I think that's where I
mentioned I had a problem.
| us remember a time in which there was less less abuse...
reported....
| less broken homes,
but still disfunctional...
| Some men are extremely opportunistic to the changes in social mores. Some men
| take advantage of distressed women, divorcees who are emotionally unbalanced,
| women who are on the rebound, etc.
Greg, life has always been like this. People also prey on the elderly,
rich men/women, etc.....
RE: Rest of men stuff
Greg, you seem to be focused on all the things about men. And this is
in a time where women have more say. Imagine what will happen if we ever went
back to allowing men to be in full charge? Nope, don't want to see that.
RE: women stuff
Greg, it's kind of funny, your comparisons. The things about men seem
very real, yet with women, it's like it's fantasy. Like they really aren't any
better off now. I like todays women because instead of letting the boat sink,
they speak up, instead of getting coffee and taking orders, they are part of
the decisions, leaders, instead of staying home and pregnant, cooking,
cleaning, they are out there earning a living. I think the hardest part for
SOME men is that they now have to help out around the house. :-) NOW, some
women don't mind being like your description. That's their choice. But if a
woman wants more, there is no reason why she should be able to. If she wants
more than 2 caffinated cola's, then she should be able to do just that.
| would like to simply focus their attention of home and family. But can't. They
| got swept into the 'liberated woman' torrent, and got left high and dry by its
| raging currents.
Greg, do you really believe this?
| Many would like their men to wear the pants in the family and to take the role
| of leader.
Then let it happen! There is NOTHING wrong with it as long as the
decision has been made by the couple, not by the things you described.
Glen
|
| 978.11 | Paul was not anti-women, but anti-disturbance | FRETZ::HEISER | Grace changes everything | Mon Sep 26 1994 16:45 | 15 |
| > j.) Women were not allowed to speak out in church or town meetings.
I saw an interesting commentary on Paul's statement in regards to women
being silent in the Church. It seems in those days that the men and
women sat on opposite sides of the church. Today, if you or your
spouse hears something from the pulpit they don't understand, you can
whisper out the details together. Back in those days, the woman used
to have to yell across the room to consult with her husband. This is
what Paul was speaking out against.
Paul was not anti-women in the Church. In other passages, Paul
remarked on how big a help certain women were to him. Phoebe, for
example, in Romans 16 delivered the epistle to the Romans for Paul.
Mike
|
| 978.12 | | FRETZ::HEISER | Grace changes everything | Mon Sep 26 1994 16:46 | 2 |
| Greg's preferred method of churchdom is big on women pastors. Notice
how he skipped that...
|
| 978.14 | | BIGQ::SILVA | Memories..... | Mon Sep 26 1994 19:10 | 10 |
|
Greg, your note you just wrote, and .0, are two notes talking about 2
seperate things. The note you just wrote makes perfect sense. .0, which was
the note I had a problem with, makes no sense to me. That's why I was asking
about it. I'm glad you wrote what you did in your last note, as we all should
be servants to Him.
Glen
|
| 978.15 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Mon Sep 26 1994 19:37 | 17 |
| It's .7 that I find offensive.
Women will continue the process of defining who we are and what we will
become on our own terms.
We will also empower men to determine who they are and who they will
become on their own terms.
The "traditional" relationships between women and men never worked.
Jesus was one of the world's greatest spokespersons for turning upside
down traditional relationships between women and men.
Perhaps if all, women and men, follow the advice of Jesus we will all
move toward a world where everyone is empowered to live the best life
they can.
Patricia
|
| 978.17 | I agree with God... | YIELD::GRIFFIS | | Mon Sep 26 1994 19:44 | 66 |
| #1 Scripture Establishes The Authority Of The Husband
--------- ----------- --- --------- -- --- -------
a.)"Likewise, ye wives, be in SUBJECTION to your own husbands;" (1Pet. 3:1)
b.)"For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted
in God, adorned themselves, being in SUBJECTION to their own husbands:
even as Sarah OBEYED Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye
are." 1 Peter 3:5,6
c.)"Let the woman learn in silence with all SUBJECTION. But I suffer not
a woman to teach, or to usurp authority over the man, but to
be in silence." (1 Tim. 3:11,12)
d.)"Wives, SUBMIT yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is
fit (APPROPRIATE/RIGHT) in the Lord." (Col. 3:18)
#2 Scripture Establishes the Rulership of the husband
--------- ----------- --- --------- -- --- -------
a.)Thy desire shall be subject to thy husband & he shall RULE over thee.Gen.3:16
b.) "One that RULES well his own house, having his children in subjection with
all gravity. For if a man know not how to RULE his own house well,
how shall be take care of the church of God?" 1 Tim. 3:4,5
c.) "Wives submit yourselves unto your own husbands as unto the Lord. For the
husband is the HEAD of the wife, even as Christ is the HEAD of the
church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore, as the church
is SUBJECT to Christ, so let the wives be SUBJECT to their own husbands
in EVERYTHING." Eph. 5:22-24
#3 Ruling over confessions, vows, oaths
------ ---- ------------ ----- -----
a.) "But if her husband has utterly made them void on the day he heard, then
_whatsoever_ proceeds from her lips concerning her vows, or concerning
the bonds of her soul, shall NOT stand; her husband has made them void;
and the Lord shall forgive her." Num. 30:12
b.) "Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may
establish it, or her husband may make it void." Num. 30:13
#4 Ruling in Love to Build, Nourish, Edify, Strengthen
------ -- ---- -- ----- ------- ----- ----------
a.) "Husbands, LOVE your wives, even as Christ loved the church,
and gave Himself for it." Eph. 5:25
b.) "So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies.
He that loves his wife loves himself." Eph. 5:28
c.) "Husbands LOVE your wives, and be not bitter against them." Col.3:19
d.)"For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourishes it and
cherishes it, even as the Lord the church". Eph. 5:29
e.)"seeks not his own, but the wife". 1 Cor. 7
f.)"But if any will not provide not for his own, and specially for
those of his own house, he has denied the faith" 1 Tim. 5:8
#5 Corruption of Authority
---------- -- ---------
He said, 'Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife'" (Gen. 3:17)
Points to note: a.) Eve was "the weaker vessel", ( 1 Peter 3:7 )
b.) The enemy attacked through Eve, ( Gen. 3 )
c.) "the woman was deceived", ( 1 Tim. )
d.) Adam "hearkened to his wife", ( Gen. 3:17 )
e.) Adam yielded authority to her
f.) That authority was usurped, mishandled, and lost
Adam lost his whole world because he failed to operate in his authority. For
anyone to try to undermine my authority as the head of my household for any
reason is substantially wrong. Adam hearkened and suffered hurt. God gave me
the authority. I am the head of my household, and that authority comes not
from man, but of God. I am offended by any efforts to usurp,imbalance, under-
-mine that authority of God. I always seek God's help in upholding, maintaining
and supporting said authority. Romans 13 says that they that resist the
authorities of God are out line with the Word.
|
| 978.18 | | YIELD::GRIFFIS | | Mon Sep 26 1994 19:47 | 3 |
|
Thus, I believe that women who rebel against their husbands,
are in effect, in rebellion against God!
|
| 978.19 | | GRIM::MESSENGER | Bob Messenger | Mon Sep 26 1994 19:48 | 4 |
| I have to admit that I thought .0 was a joke. I couldn't believe that
anyone would be seriously proposing this!
-- Bob
|
| 978.20 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Mon Sep 26 1994 19:49 | 25 |
| That is the line of reasoning used throughout history to support the
status quo including the Divine rights of Kings and other rulers. It is
close to Emperor worship as practiced in the time of Jesus.
When scholars examine the Gospels and Epistles to determine what part
of the canon reflects the earliest Jesus tradition and what part
evolved as the church evolved, they can demonstrate a movement away
from a spirit that was a radical attempt to reform judaism to one which
supported the establishment of the hierarchy of the Christian church as
it was developing.
The most common example is the evolution of the beatitude
Blessed are the poor.
To blessed are the poor in spirit.
The earliest tradition showed Jesus particularly favoring the poor,
oppressed, and marginalized including women who were marginalized at
that time.
The latter tradition spiritualized that concepts so the support of the
marginalized is no longer so evident.
Patricia
|
| 978.21 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Mon Sep 26 1994 20:04 | 38 |
| .19
Bob,
It is not surprising to me. There are many who will use the Bible as a
tool of oppression. That is why I am so adament against a literal
reading of the Bible. It can be used as a tool of sexists, rascists,
homophobes, and others in power to justify the status quo and oppress
others.
The books cited are books that are distant from the Jesus tradition
such as the books of Timothy and Titus. 2 Peter.
The message preached by Jesus and even the message preached by Paul(for
the most part) is a radical egalitarian message.
By the time of Ephesians, Colleseans, Timothy and Titus, roman
household codes which supported the hierarchy of master over slave, man
over woman, crept into the Biblical texts. What this shows is the
institutionalization of the Christian religion and the conservative
influence of that institutionalization.
What has been amazing about Christianity is its ability to reform
itself. This happened most notably in the Reformation which resulted
in the establishment of Protestant Christianity and the reform of
Catholic Christianity.
This is also happening again today in the liberation theology movement,
where by going back to the early Jesus movement, scriptures can be used
to support justice, equality, and the ending of oppression.
There are quite a few resistors who yearn for the days when absolute
power was either in the hands of or thought to be in the hands of free,
white, male, heterosexuals.
Patricia,
From my radical feminist side.
|
| 978.23 | helpmate | FRETZ::HEISER | Grace changes everything | Mon Sep 26 1994 20:33 | 4 |
| We are not to abuse our authority either. Besides, a woman that
doesn't love her husband probably can't submit to him.
Mike
|
| 978.24 | don't worship the fallen nature! | LGP30::FLEISCHER | without vision the people perish (DTN 297-5780, MRO3-3/L16) | Mon Sep 26 1994 21:15 | 15 |
| re Note 978.17 by YIELD::GRIFFIS:
> #2 Scripture Establishes the Rulership of the husband
> --------- ----------- --- --------- -- --- -------
> a.)Thy desire shall be subject to thy husband & he shall RULE over thee.Gen.3:16
This one is easy to explain -- the husband's tendency to
dominate is a result of the fall, part of the fallen nature,
the curse.
Just as with any other aspect of the fallen nature, it is not
something to be held up as a good thing, but in fact is
something which needs to be overcome.
Bob
|
| 978.25 | | SUBURB::ODONNELLJ | Julie O'Donnell | Tue Sep 27 1994 06:33 | 4 |
| I can't take the base note seriously either. Glen is right - the bad
far outweighs the good (but then I'm biased!).
I think Greg is very much tongue-in-cheek and the society he proposes
is far more restrictive than anything the Victorians dreamed up.
|
| 978.26 | Written by men for males. | VNABRW::BUTTON | Another day older and deeper in debt | Tue Sep 27 1994 07:04 | 19 |
| Re: Most of Greg's notes in this string.
The verses quoted are all (apparently) supportive of the subjection
of women to male dominance.
This is why I have great difficulty shaking off the suspicion that
those -- be it church or (predominantly male) individuals -- who
continue to insist that the bible was literally written by God,
do so in order to justify this male-dominance position. By holding
God as the author, they can deny responsibility for an attitude
which, in reality, refelcts their own inner desires.
Personally, I believe that the opression of the female would run
contrary to God's will and that the biblical texts quoted were
authored by males who, even then, hid behind the skirts of God
in attributing the attitude to Him instead of coming straight out
and saying "IMO women should be the slaves of men."
Greetings, Derek.
|
| 978.27 | Walls Will Stand Until Suspision Ends | AIMHI::JMARTIN | | Tue Sep 27 1994 11:16 | 8 |
| >>There are quite a few resistors who yearn for the days when absolute
>>power was either in the hands of or thought to be in the hands of
>>free white, male, heterosexuals.
Re: Affirmative Action
Glen, I rest my case!!!
|
| 978.30 | Using the Bible for Oppression is evil | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Tue Sep 27 1994 12:45 | 58 |
| 978.26
Derek,
Greetings and thank you. Your note mirrors my thoughts pretty well. I
expect women to understand the relationship between the literal
interpretation of the Bible and the oppression of women, slaves,
minorities, the poor etc. I appreciate it when men also understand and
are vocal about that oppression.
Committed loving sex with an adult partner can be one of the most
beautiful ways we express our spirituality. There is no evil in this
kind of complete committment to another.
And when two people are so committed to each other over a period of
time and then that love dies, it is sad but not evil. Staying together
and pretending or staying together and making each other miserable is
Sinful.
Fortunately there is a relative equality between women and men today
that was far from present in the time of Jesus. Women were deemed
valueless if they were not connected to their fathers or husbands. In
fact the hebrew tradition of circumcism, made the circumsized penis the
symbol of the covenant between humans and God, and that in fact related
women to the covenant only through their husbands and fathers. This
was not ordained by God but ordained by men. Women were bearly able to
survive outside the orbit of their fathers and husbands. Therefore to
divorce a woman, put her at extreme risk. She then had no means of a
livlihood. And since men only wanted to marry virgins, she had little
hope of remarriage either. Mother or Whore are the two states of
womanhood expressed in the bible. And the greatest state of womanhood
is Virgin Motherhood. Motherhood undefiled by fornication.
Using the Bible to support this kind of oppression is Evil. Those who
profane this sacred book by using it as a tool to oppression will never
inherit the Kingdom of God to which they think they aspire.
Sexism in all its forms is evil. Slavery in all its forms is evil.
The oppression of Gay and Lesbians in all its forms is evil. Using the
bible to support these evils is evil.
And that is exactly the choice that each one of us makes when we decide
to accept as the literal word of God such quotes as "Women be subject
to your husband" "Slave be subject to your Master" "Don't rebel
against authority figures because their authority comes from God"
That is the kind of fascism that allowed for a Hitler to take over
Germany. Was Hitler in authority because he was ordained by God to
be in authority? Was it evil for people to fight this God ordained
authority.
The same texts that are used to "keep women in their places" were used
to keep slaves in their places during the days of slavery and could be
used to support a tyrant like Hitler.
Is that what those who believe in inerrancy choose?
Patricia
|
| 978.31 | | AIMHI::JMARTIN | | Tue Sep 27 1994 13:52 | 22 |
| Patricia:
My boss is an energetic but young individual. Leadership requires respect.
Unfortunately, she has alot to learn. However, at the same time,
She needs the Lord in her life; and God has called me to
wash her feet if you will. Speaking from human terms, it is NOT right!
But, as Paul stated, we are to be subject to authority. Yes, this
includes spouses, governments, and yes, young energetic unqualified
supervisors. Our ego's need to take back seat to our witness and
testimony. We all have our crosses to bear in this area!!
--------------------------------------
Greg/
If I am married and I divorce my wife so that I may marry another, then
I have committed adultery. This is what Jesus is referring to here.
This is why there is a distinction between one who is divorced getting
remarried verses a widow getting remarried.
-Jack
|
| 978.32 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Tue Sep 27 1994 14:08 | 16 |
| Jack,
You did not answer regarding Hitler. If you were a German in Germany
in 1933 would you be called to wash his feet?
According to a literal reading of the Household codes in Timothy and
Titus you would.
According to an interpretive reading of Jesus overturning the tables in
the temple, you would be called to oppose evil.
As I stated, sexism, rascism, homophobia are all evil.
Patricia
|
| 978.34 | | AIMHI::JMARTIN | | Tue Sep 27 1994 15:38 | 16 |
| I can only answer the Hitler question in this way. As a citizen, I am
called to render to Caeser what is Caesers. This means that as a
taxpayer, I am required by law to yield taxes to the establishment,
even though I may not agree with the establishment itself. I call to
your attention the prophet Daniel. He was called to be head over all
the satraps and governors. Yet at the same time, I follow God instead
of man by breaking the law of King Darius; praying to his God.
It is also interesting that Paul, a man executed by Rome, told us that
governments and authorities are placed by the edict of God and that we
are to follow them.
As far as gender issues are concerned, I once again reiterate that man
was created with specific roles as were women.
-Jack
|
| 978.35 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Tue Sep 27 1994 17:40 | 20 |
| Jack,
your examples of the contradictions in the Bible on the topic of
authority are instructive.
Knowing what the Word of God truly is difficult.
Anyone who maintains that they absolutely know what the Word of God is,
has in fact, deemed themselves a god.
Those who have thus deemed themselves a god and condemn others based on
their absolute knowledge of the Word of God, are on very shaky grounds.
Particularly if they believe bearing false witness is evil.
As a human, I must be content to live with an imperfect understanding
of God and his will for humankind. As a human, I am suspicious of
those who do not accept their own imperfect understanding.
Patricia
|
| 978.37 | | FRETZ::HEISER | Grace changes everything | Tue Sep 27 1994 19:09 | 9 |
| > As a human, I must be content to live with an imperfect understanding
> of God and his will for humankind. As a human, I am suspicious of
> those who do not accept their own imperfect understanding.
if you have "imperfect understanding" why then can you say the Bible is
perfectly fallible and lean to some New Age philosophies? I'm sorry,
Patricia, but this statement doesn't reconcile with past discussions.
Mike
|
| 978.38 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Wed Sep 28 1994 13:10 | 86 |
| Mike,
I never said the bible was perfectly fallible.
I said it is mediated through imperfect human beings and therefore it
is imperfect. To believe that the bible is completely infallible leads
to evil and therefore one needs to ask whether that believe itself may
be evil. Forcing beliefs such as "Slave obey your master" Woman obey
your husband" "Subject always obey your King" has led to great evils.
Slavery in the United States and throughout the world was justified by
such a belief.
Obedience to Hitler and the lack of resistance to Hitler by the German
Christian Churches was a result.
The Oppression of Women is a result.
My attempt to show that this belief is erroneous is not a disparagement
of the Bible. It is a disparagement of one interpretation of the
Bible.
Study of the Bible is necessary. But real honest detached study to
help discern what is truly from God and what is not.
There are things in the Bible that are not from God.
When Paul says, Let those who unfaith you, castrate themselves, that is
not from God. That is from Paul the imperfect human responding out of
anger, just as members of this conference sometimes respond out of
anger.
There are also some truly radical, divinely inspired messages in the
Bible, such as the radical love commandments that are throughout the
new testament. A commandment to love our neighbors, love ourselves,
to love God and even to love our enemies.
The more we know about the Bible, the authors, the intent of the
authors, the political, economic, and social environments the more we
can be in touch with the divine inspiration.
There are many who in my opinion do not honestly study the Bible. They
begin with the assumption that the Bible is one coherent inerrant whole
and make the study of the Bible fit into that assumption. That
distorts the whole Bible.
When I pushed the issue in here I found that very few of the Christian
women in here wear hats to church and very few of the Christian men in
here insist that their wifes and daughters wear hats. These Christians
while insisting that the Bible is the infallible forever word of God,
pick and choose which verses of the Bible are forever infallible and
which are not.
When I pushed the issue of those who insist that Homosexuality is
abominable, what is their reactions to premarital sex and divorce and
remarriage, masturbation, oral sex, etc and the implication is that
many do in choose some of these acts themselves, some are divorce and
remarried, many were involved in sex prior to marriage yet they find
homosexual's more nauseating than any of these other sexual "sinners".
They have picked and choosen which "sin" and group of "sinners" to take
up battle with.
There is no campaign against books for children that try to explain
divorce, that try to explain living in a single parent household, but a
simple children books that potrays a little boy with two fathers is
deemed the height of evil. Picking and choosing again.
So yes, I pick and choose which parts of the Bible inspire me.
I pick the authentic teachings of Jesus over the inauthentic.
I pick the authentic teachings of Jesus over the teachings of Paul.
I pick the authentic teachings of Paul over the inauthentic.
I deem revelations, timothy, and titus, as uninpirational.
I pick and choose just like the Bible believing Christians do. I just
do in more openly and honestly.
I pick in choose the authentic teachings of Jesus which preach a message of
love rather than revelations which teaches a message of arrogance, inclusive
Christianity and Revenge.
How do you pick and choose?
Patricia
|
| 978.39 | An echo | VNABRW::BUTTON | Another day older and deeper in debt | Wed Sep 28 1994 13:43 | 17 |
| Re 978.38: Patricia.
Well said, Patricia. I can echo that.
I have come to the conclusion that I will never understand what
moves people to insist on the literl interpretation of the bible
and/or its total inerrancy.
Most, it seems to me, have a genuine need for this position. As
you pointed out, the results of literal/inerrant interpretation
can be evil. That does not make the literalist evil.
But the same could be said of the inverse case: the results of
completely ignoring the Biblical message can also be evil. I would
be more likely to find these persons evil.
Greetings, Derek.
|
| 978.40 | expressed much of what I believe *very* well | LGP30::FLEISCHER | without vision the people perish (DTN 297-5780, MRO3-3/L16) | Wed Sep 28 1994 13:46 | 7 |
| re Note 978.38 by POWDML::FLANAGAN:
Patricia,
If we had a "hall of fame" note, this one would be in it!
Bob
|
| 978.41 | | BIGQ::SILVA | Memories..... | Wed Sep 28 1994 13:58 | 24 |
| | <<< Note 978.16 by YIELD::GRIFFIS >>>
| they should want to do what His Word says, right?
You had me pegged until here Greg. His Word is where we will disagree,
as *my* believe says His Word is not here.
| If God is the God who wrote the Bible, ( which He is ),
According to your beliefs, yes.
| and the Bible supports the headship and the authority of the man, ( which it
| does ), then isn't rebellion against God's person in authority in a household
| kind of like rebellion against God Himself? And, is not that a form of
| disobedience?
My belief tells me man wrote the Bible, it is not inerrant because of
this, so it can not be God's Word. If you want to discuss inerrancy issues, we
can go to that topic. But suffice to say that we have different beliefs on the
Bible, therefor our opposing views.
Glen
|
| 978.42 | We may be tools at times, but we ain't no way the Power! | BIGQ::SILVA | Memories..... | Wed Sep 28 1994 14:02 | 13 |
| | <<< Note 978.21 by POWDML::FLANAGAN "I feel therefore I am" >>>
| There are quite a few resistors who yearn for the days when absolute power was
| either in the hands of or thought to be in the hands of free, white, male,
| heterosexuals.
This is what I believe gets us into trouble so often. People thinking
the power is with them, instead of with Him. If all of us could remember this,
then this world would be such a much better place to live.
Glen
|
| 978.43 | | BIGQ::SILVA | Memories..... | Wed Sep 28 1994 14:03 | 8 |
| | <<< Note 978.27 by AIMHI::JMARTIN >>>
| Re: Affirmative Action Glen, I rest my case!!!
It's about time!
|
| 978.44 | | BIGQ::SILVA | Memories..... | Wed Sep 28 1994 14:06 | 11 |
|
RE .28
Greg, please clear something up for me. You said whoever gets a 2nd
marriage is an adulterer/ess, yet the Scripture you quoted from says only those
who got a divorce other than sex outside of marriage. It would seem these
people who had this happen to them could remarry. Is this something you believe
to be true?
|
| 978.46 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Wed Sep 28 1994 14:21 | 21 |
| Greg,
My answer is simple.
I worship God.
Not myself.
Not the Bible.
I do not have faith in the Bible being God.
I do not have faith in the Bible being the innerant Word of God.
I Do have faith in the Bible being an inpiration from God.
Imperfectly mediated by humans, each with their own Agenda's and self
agrandizement getting in the way of perfection.
Do you ever let your own self agrandizement get in the way of your own
Worship and Witness? Does you ideology about the Bible help or hinder
your human impulse toward self agrandizement.
Patricia
|
| 978.49 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Wed Sep 28 1994 16:05 | 19 |
| Interesting!
This sounds a whole lot like Greg's Spirit to me.
It also sounds like the spirit is playing a win/loose game to me.
> It was almost like when someone slams down their trump
> cards, and says, "Read 'em and weep" in a very triumphant tone of
> voice, and then sweeps up everybody else's cards.
> Moreover, I sat
> there shocked, while I could feel the Holy Spirit glowing with
> a certain joy all around me. You know. The kind of joy one gets
> when they get a perfect score, or win a chess match, or gets
> matchpoint.
|
| 978.50 | Love | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Wed Sep 28 1994 16:12 | 19 |
| Derek,
The Biblical message is a message of Love.
There are some Bible Believing "Christians" who ignore the message of
Love.
There are some liberal "Christians" who ignore the message of Love.
There are many non Christians who have heard the message of Love from
other scriptures, from deep within their own hearts, from being in
loving relationships.
There are non "Christians" who ignore the message of Love.
The adequacy of any religion, including secular humanism for me is
defined by how well it etches that message of Love on one's heart.
Patricia
|
| 978.51 | | BIGQ::SILVA | Memories..... | Wed Sep 28 1994 16:15 | 37 |
| | <<< Note 978.47 by YIELD::GRIFFIS >>>
| The problem with saying that the Bible is not really the word of God is that
| the word of God is actually the seed/basis/kernel upon which faith comes and
| exists within the heart of man.
Greg, I believe the above can happen. But I also believe, and have
witnessed other means of planting the seed of faith in one's head. I have seen
the Bible used as a quite effective tool that God uses, but I have also seen
Him use other tools that also do a great job. It does not mean that the Bible,
or any of these other tools He uses are inerrant.
| The Word, then, forms the very root of faith.
Greg, thank you for helping me illistrate something. To the new comer,
will they effectively interpret the Bible everytime? Nope. Not even someone who
has been around for a while can do this. The Bible is a tool used by God, but
like with anything else, it does not mean it is inerrant (the tool is not
inerrant, not the use of the tool by God)
| Without the word of God, you have no basis for true faith.
I have Him. The Word can only be as good as the interpretation. That
comes in both reading and during the writing.
| One that may fool some of the best. But God, who looks inside of the heart,
| knows which one is true, and which one is not.
And this is the approach that is best. Let God figure out who is
following Him, believes in Him, loves Him, and serves Him. He is the One, and
the ONLY one, who will be doing the judging in the end anyway.
| Did I tell you that I come from Gardner? :-)
Oh great... Greg is the reaper.... I never see you wear black in the
building Greg!!!??? heh heh...
|
| 978.53 | 978.15 Flanagan | COMET::DYBEN | | Thu Sep 29 1994 00:17 | 9 |
|
> Women will continue the process of defining who we are and what we
> will become on our own terms
And in the interim please continue telling men what to do, how to
act, and what everything means :-)
David
|
| 978.54 | The Bible as the Word.. | VNABRW::BUTTON | Another day older and deeper in debt | Thu Sep 29 1994 06:52 | 47 |
| Re: 978.47 Greg
> The problem with saying that the Bible is
>not really the word of God is that the word of God
>is actually the seed/basis/kernel upon which faith
>comes and exists within the heart of man. The Word,
>then, forms the very root of faith.
and
> Without the Word of God, you have no
>basis for true faith.
If I read this correctly, you are saying that, without the Bible,
true faith (in God) is impossible.
Should this be a correct reading, I am astonished that you can
so readily sweep aside the thousands/millions (?) within the
Christian world who do not regard the Bible as "not really the
word of God" but rather the word of men who had faith in God.
The faith of these Christians in God cannot be so negated.
And then, there are the Jews who only have half a Bible: Is
their faith rated only 50%?
I think that classifiying the Bible as God's Word is the first
step down a slippery path.
Firstly, it tends to limit the Word to the Bible (on one reading
of your note, this could be taken to be your position). Limiting
the Word of God -- an everlasting, ever was, ever will be, God --
to the confines of, say, a thousand years and forty-odd authors
is, at the very least presumptious if not downright anti-God.
Secondly: By claiming God's authorship of the Bible is to assume
God's stamp of approval on the atrocities described therein and
attributed to Him. This may not be your personal position but it
is certainly the position of many of your "brothers in Christ".
Such a position is legitimate given that God granted humankind
the will to choose. It does not however give anyone the right to
judge those who find it impossible to love God and, at the same
time, in the spirit of that love, choose to see human authorship
of the Bible.
I sincerely hope that I have misunderstood your note; or read too
much into it.
Greetings, Derek.
|
| 978.56 | | FRETZ::HEISER | Grace changes everything | Thu Sep 29 1994 16:25 | 7 |
| > I pick and choose just like the Bible believing Christians do. I just
> do in more openly and honestly.
I pray that God will deal with me severely if any ever consider myself
worthy to pick and choose out of His Word.
Mike
|
| 978.57 | I believe you believe that | LGP30::FLEISCHER | without vision the people perish (DTN 297-5780, MRO3-3/L16) | Thu Sep 29 1994 16:43 | 21 |
| re Note 978.56 by FRETZ::HEISER:
> > I pick and choose just like the Bible believing Christians do. I just
> > do in more openly and honestly.
>
> I pray that God will deal with me severely if any ever consider myself
> worthy to pick and choose out of His Word.
Mike,
What you wrote above is consistent with what Patricia wrote.
You don't consider yourself to be picking and choosing.
However, to some observers it is clear that "traditional
Christians" do in fact pick and choose (or follow doctrine
that is the result of another picking and choosing). Most of
them seem to deny it by any of a number of methods (including
appeals to inspired Church teaching, claims that the meaning
they happened to follow is "plain" or "clear", or 2000 years
of precedent).
Bob
|
| 978.59 | | FRETZ::HEISER | Grace changes everything | Thu Sep 29 1994 16:56 | 2 |
| I don't feel I do, and I don't believe you know me well enough yet to
say that I do pick and choose ;-)
|
| 978.61 | | FRETZ::HEISER | Grace changes everything | Thu Sep 29 1994 18:23 | 1 |
| Depends on what's involved...
|
| 978.63 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Fri Sep 30 1994 13:07 | 16 |
| Hi David,
> Women will continue the process of defining who we are and what we will
> become on our own terms.
> We will also empower men to determine who they are and who they will
> become on their own terms.
In those two quotes I was trying to say that men cannot define women
and women cannot define men. We have to empower each other to be the
best that each of us can be. Forgive me if that parallelism did
not come through.
Patricia
|
| 978.64 | Hermaneutical problems. | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Fri Sep 30 1994 13:17 | 17 |
| Gee Greg,
Do you consider introductions to be a hermaneutical problem? How?
By the way, to invite everyone into this word game.
Theologians are like technologists. They invent wonderful buzzwords to
make the profession sound esoteric.
As I remember, hermaneutics is a word coming from literary criticm
regarding studying the nature of a document. Biblical Hermaneutics is the
study of the nature of the Bible. (That's from memory so if someone
has a better definition, please add it.)
Patricia
|
| 978.66 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Fri Sep 30 1994 15:49 | 6 |
| Actually its five courses down twenty five to go.
Sure you all can come. The only problem is at this rate it will be
2006 before I graduate.
Patricia
|
| 978.69 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Fri Sep 30 1994 16:47 | 8 |
| Greg,
That's an easy answers.
Since cigarettes are obviously an invention of the Devil, No one should
ever offer another a cigarette.
Patricia
|
| 978.71 | | POWDML::FLANAGAN | I feel therefore I am | Fri Sep 30 1994 18:12 | 3 |
| You must have missed my notes on poor Jezebel getting the bums wrap.
Patricia
|
| 978.75 | | FRETZ::HEISER | Grace changes everything | Mon Oct 03 1994 16:31 | 1 |
| Better living through chemicals again, eh Greg?!
|
| 978.77 | | FRETZ::HEISER | Grace changes everything | Mon Oct 03 1994 18:46 | 3 |
| Now that's an Arminianist comment if I've ever heard one!
Mike
|