Featured Yes, 12 Disciples were men, but women respected and found empty tomb . . . is this enough so women can be preachers, too?

[Multicolored Lemur]

But why more harsh on women? Weren't also men disorderly?

Yes, seems harsh, and ridiculous.

I’m going to post a gallup poll that most Christians view the Bible as inspired by God, but not literal. And Christians taking the Bible as literal is the second most common position.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Fewer in U.S. Now See Bible as Literal Word of God

Coinciding with a general decline in religiosity in the U.S., a record-low 20% of Americans now say they believe the Bible is literally true.

news.gallup.com

“The majority of Christians (58%) say the Bible is the inspired word of God but not everything in it is to be taken literally, while 25% say it should be interpreted literally . . ”

———

This is amongst Christians. Maybe because they know people are people, and people make mistakes.

 

[Scooter]

The underlined parts are in favor of hierarchy of men as more important than women. The boldfaced parts are in favor of equal rights.

Paul really goes back and forth.

No, Paul was consistent in his position on women. The problem lies in the fact that a Godless society cannot comprehend the Bible. In today's culture, the Biblical position concerning women probably does appear sexist. The Biblical stance on homosexuality comes across as homophobic to today's population. The whole of the Bible is considered antiquated and of little use to a society and culture that is without God. The things of God must be spiritually discerned and since the majority of people do not know God, the Bible is foolish to them. However, for those of us who are spiritually alive, the scriptures make perfect sense and following them is as natural as breathing. My friend, the scriptures will always be a stumbling block for you unless you are quickened in the spirit.

 

[AgnosticBoy]

Bible Gateway passage: 1 Corinthians 11 - New Living Translation

And you should imitate me, just as I imitate Christ. Instructions for Public Worship - I am so glad that you always keep me in your thoughts, and that you are following the teachings I passed on to you. But there is one thing I want you to know: The head of every man is Christ, the head of woman...

www.biblegateway.com

3 But there is one thing I want you to know: The head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4 A man dishonors his head if he covers his head while praying or prophesying. 5 But a woman dishonors her head if she prays or prophesies without a covering on her head, for this is the same as shaving her head. 6 Yes, if she refuses to wear a head covering, she should cut off all her hair! But since it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut or her head shaved, she should wear a covering.

7 A man should not wear anything on his head when worshiping, for man is made in God’s image and reflects God’s glory. And woman reflects man’s glory. 8 For the first man didn’t come from woman, but the first woman came from man. 9 And man was not made for woman, but woman was made for man. 10 For this reason, and because the angels are watching, a woman should wear a covering on her head to show she is under authority.

11 But among the Lord’s people, women are not independent of men, and men are not independent of women. 12 For although the first woman came from man, every other man was born from a woman, and everything comes from God.

—————

The underlined parts are in favor of hierarchy of men as more important than women. The boldfaced parts are in favor of equal rights.

Paul really goes back and forth.

I think this post is really helpful because of the distinctions drawn here between equal roles and hierarchy.

I'm still forming my view as we go along and looking to answer just why were men considered the head of things as this would help me answer whether or not it was sexist. So far, I see that the Jews already had a hierarchical society (patriarchy) even pre-Church era. That system was transferred over to some degree into the Church. The same way that only men could be leaders in the society outside of Church, so only men could be leaders in the Church.

But just why were men given this position instead of women. Is it sexist - hate or thinking of them lowly and not worthy of respect? That depends on the reason for these gender-based roles in the society. Basically the Bible's message is that men being created first and women being created for men. In my view, that by itself isn't sexist, but then someone could question the scientific basis for the Creation story and the claim that human males came before females.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

I’ve never been married. But I don’t think important decisions within a marriage are a case of “someone has to make a decision.”

For example, if it’s decision of whether to relocate for the sake of a higher-paying job or a job promotion, well, healthy couples have probably discussed this before in the abstract. And will probably take a day or two to discuss it again, in the specifics.

And healthy couples develop a feel for how much something matters to each other.

—————

PS Opening a thread on healthy marriages might be good idea.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

No, Paul was consistent in his position on women.

Why are we elevating the Apostle Paul, whom everyone knows is a human being, above that of Billy Graham for example? The Reverend Billy Graham may have been a sincere and good man who walked with the Lord, but he certainly could make mistakes. And I’m sure he did.

And wasn’t there some Council who made the decision of what books would be in the Bible, and which ones wouldn’t. It wasn’t the Council of Nicea (or, Nicaea) in 325. That was to drive the Arians out of the early Christian movement, come up with the Nicene Creed, and formalize the belief in the Trinity.

But it was another Council who formalized which books were in the Canon.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

Basically the Bible's message is that men being created first and women being created for men.

But I think this also talks about Eve being created from Adam’s side, and not his head or his feet.

And I take it that you’re not super impressed with the above Gallup poll which shows most actual Christians believe the Bible is inspired but not literal?

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

LibGuides: Hinduism: Sacred Texts

This is a guide to researching Hinduism using the online catalog, reference works, periodical indexes, bibliographies, concordances, sacred texts, and free web sites. Last updated 06-08-2023

libguides.lib.msu.edu

“ . . original language of early Hindu sacred books is Sanskrit and they should be appreciated through speech rather than the written word. There are two categories of texts: the revealed texts and the remembered texts. The revealed texts were supposedly the divine word heard by a primordial sage . . ”

—————————-

I’d just put “primordial sage” in “ . . ” , BIG QUOTE MARKS ! ! !

And I’d say, Yes, it’s all remembered texts.

 

[Multicolored Lemur]

And I’d ask, Why does Christianity get to be called the “Plumb Line” ? ! ?

Hindus believe they’re in contact with the divine, too. And maybe the divine is bigger than we think, and Hindus are in contact with one part of it, and Christians are in contact with a different part of it? Almost as if the divine is a large territory with many different types of terrain.

 

[Scooter]

Why are we elevating the Apostle Paul, whom everyone knows is a human being, above that of Billy Graham for example?

I’m not elevating Paul above anyone. Paul considered himself the chief of sinners. However, we do believe God inspired the writings of Paul. Not all of his writings were inspired though. Paul mentioned a previous letter to the Corinthian church that we don’t have. So it isn’t Paul I’m promoting; but his God-inspired writing.