Womenly subjection (page 3)

meangirl

I agree PSacramento that Paul's thinking was due to the times in which he lived. Let's face it women were viewed as dirt. The only thing a woman could do to possibly contribute to society was to pop out babies. I don't believe that is how God views women at all. I find that to just be a stupid tradition of the time and just one more way to opress women. What is ironic to me is that the society makes a big deal out of not following the "traditions of men" and yet that is what Paul's statements were. If you look in the scriptures you will see there is no direct command by God for women to be in subjection to their husbands and learn in silence. In regards to family life in the commandments it shows how parents are to honor their father and mother and also about not coveting your fellowman's wife, not committing adultry, etc. but there is not one direct command from God stating these ridiculous opressive statements. Certainly if a couple chooses to follow the patriarchial and opressive guidelines set forth in the scriptures as to how they want their marriage to be then by all means that is their decision. However, I like to remember such things as "there is no male or female" in God's eyes and "not to put your trust in nobles" and also read about the capable wife who sold in the market, owned property, etc. (Oh my what a naughtly girl)!!!!

PSacramento

meangirl,

My view of why Paul may have thaought how he thought is just that, mine, it may be more correct, or less, to view it in the light of that thread that narkissos posted a link to.

Whatever the case, that Paul's comments seem out of "christian character" for him, they certainly do.

Jadeen

I'm going to a Catholic college and have to take some religious classes. My instructer told us that many scholars believe there are several reasons for Paul saying this.

1. Jewish men and women were taught seperately, with women receiving less of an education than men. Early Christians studied together and women would often interrupt these studies to ask questions. That's why Paul basically said, "Ask your man when you get home!"

2. It was tradition for women at the time to wear some kind of head covering.

Notice in the scriptures that Paul says, "I want women to be modest..." 1 Tim. 2:9 "I do not let women teach men..." 1 Tim. 2:12 He's not saying "the Lord requires..." Sounds like Paul is stating an opinion.

vikesgirl101

Jadeen: That is a good point here that you stated on how it appears to be what Paul wants, not what God requires. I guess this whole concept irks me because I had to explain to a body of elders personal things that went on in my house. They could no relate. All that they could do was assume that I was not a proper wife.

I have been to a few churches now, and what strikes me is how women are allowed to have a say. They are allowed to exhort others, conduct theip own Bible study session groups, and teach children. To me that is more in line with the way Timothy's mother and grandmother raised him. But if you were to ask Paul, they were still dirt.

vikesgirl101

I cannot spell today. Sorry.

meangirl

Hi Vikesgirl101 your not the only one who can't spell today but apparantly reading over my posts I can't spell or use the right word!!!

avishai

Paul was a dick.

horrible life

I couldn't have said it better avishai!

vikesgirl101

Avishai: Very profound! I think I love you!! LOL

Anyways, I had an awful time with this last night. I mean, can we pick and choose which parts of the Bible we like?? I have a problem with this. Was it Paul that said the women are a large army? Maybe not. Who said God is not partial? Maybe it was towards men.

Anyways, Paul is not my favorite Bible writer anymore. He basically said women are there to make babies.

Can I say I am still a Christian if I disagree with Paul's writings?

Priest73

Paul was liked a good dick.

I think Timothy was wearing it.

Womenly subjection

Share this