just like some openly call others liars
Your Lord called me a future liar just the other day. We can setup witnesses. I pursue truth with the same fervor as he had to call me a future liar.
Childbirth, A Protection For Women (Per Paul)... How?
by AGuest 212 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
AGuest
Just an observation but maybe Paul remained single cause no woman in her right mind would have him?
You could be right, dear Azazel (peace to you, dear one!), at least by today's standards.
Always felt his words were a bit harsh on our dear sisters.( smarter than me thats for sure)
The were "law", which Paul was overly concerned with. He eventually loosened his "grip", though... as my Lord's teachings progressed IN him. Praise JAH it did! LOLOLOL!
Keep on doing your ministry AGuest 1 Corinthians 4:26
Ahhh... THANK you, dear one. Truly. I really do appreciate your kindness!
Regards
The greatest of love and peace to you, as well!
YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,
SA
-
AGuest
I've always imagined God doing what he always does, responding to challenges, like when he rained fire down from heaven at Elijah's behest, or sent a bear to kill children, or let Satan torture Job (although it appears the Lord himself did a wee bit o' the torturing there).
Well, I'm not Elijah, by ANY stretch, dear EP (peace to you, dear one!), my Lord never sent any bears to kill anyone (so neither did God), and if Job didn't have a problem with having to answer for himself, I certainly don't. My Lord had nothing to do with Job's challenge... and neither did the Father (other than to allow Job to respond, rather than intervening and responding FOR him).
So there's still that open challenge to him. Should be a piece of cake.
Well, be sure to let us know when He responds, dear one. I'm sure He will (no doubt, actually)... but perhaps not in the way you're demanding (although perhaps in that way, as well - His choice, not mine). Either way, I'm sure you'll have absolutely NO problem knowing that He did. Me, though... I am going to stay out of it. Dealing with you regarding these matters just isn't on my list anymore. As far as I'm concerned, you were answered, so we're done there. Keeping posting as to it, if you wish, though; they're your fingers, love.
Again, peace to you!
YOUR servant (always) and a slave of Christ,
SA
-
EntirelyPossible
Well, be sure to let us know when He responds, dear one.
Sorry, dear, in for a penny, in for a pound. This is on you as well.
Me, though... I am going to stay out of it. Dealing with you regarding these matters just isn't on my list anymore.
It will on on all your topics, however. Frequently and often.
As far as I'm concerned, you were answered, so we're done there. Keeping posting as to it, if you wish, though; they're your fingers, love.
No, we aren't done, dear Shel. We can take it to the moderators if you like. Your Lord can accept the challenge or simply apologize. The issue will NOT go away until it is resolved.
-
Broken Promises
I'd like to see "the Lord's" evidence of EP being a drunkard.
It's a libellous statement, and not one that should be thrown around without real proof.
-
StoneWall
May you all have peace, love and rock n' roll
The thing I'd like to focus on from the opening post is the Ellipsis (the ...) after 1 Tim.2:15 is partially quoted.
When you see that in a quote it means something was intentionally left out, sometimes changing the meaning of the original context by not appearing in complete form.
The Watchtower has done this many times and I always like to go back and read the original documentation if at all possible.
But getting back to the opening post lets look at why the reasoning that is given is not supported in the scriptures that are cited when read in complete form. I'm going to quote that one verse from a number of translations in its entirety to compare what is said to what is meant.
(In each case notice the qualifying word that I underline in each quote and notice how it applies to the over-all scripture)
1 Tim. 2:15 [New World Translation] However, she will be kept safe through childbearing, provided they continue in faith and love and sanctification along with soundness of mind.
1 Tim. 2:15 [New International Version] But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
1 Tim. 2:15 [King James Version] Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.
1 Tim. 2:15[Young's Literal translation] and she shall be saved through the child-bearing, if they remain in faith, and love, and sanctification, with sobriety.
End of 1 Tim. 2:15 bible quotes.
So notice how it does go on in that scipture to qualify how the woman would be safe not just through the act of child-bearing as brought out in the opening post but it would be dependant on continuing in faith,love, holiness etc.
That is why I can't buy into the argument of what is initially presenting by AGuest in the opening post in this thread.
Her reference to Exodus chapter 21 is totally independent (and I see no correlation at all) of 1 Tim. 2:15 in that Exodus is talking about the "consequences" of what would befall someone that harmed a pregnant woman, and Timothy is dealing with not just pregnancy but the act of child-bearing and continuing on and remaining faithful etc.
Let's compare this to modern day. I'm going to make-up a scripture and you see how it changes by just leaving out the part where "if" is in the verse.
StoneWall 2:15 "And StoneWall decided to give AGuest one thousand dollars, if she traveled around the world two times by sailboat."
Now in view of that imaginary scripture, what if AGuest made the claim that StoneWall was going to give her $1000 dollars?
While not totally a false-hood, it would actually be misleading due to the fact that it is dependant on her satisfying the qualifying part of "if she traveled around the world two times by sailboat."
Anyways I hope everyone had happy holidays and a great new year to all.
StoneWall (a free man now and forever)
-
cofty
BTS has already nailed it - whatever your lord told you is wrong. Paul explained himself very clearly in the verse.
Let a woman learn in silence with full submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach, or to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and came to be in transgression. However, she will be kept safe through childbearing..." - 1 Timothy 2:11-15
The writer of this edict, who may have been Paul, some scholars think otherwise, had a low view of women and used Genesis to justify his oppressive rules.
-
Fernando
Thanks for sharing Shelby, and for the interesting context.
It seems when we interpret scripture from a religious (instead of spiritual) perspective we see the "god of religion's" attitude towards women.
I personally am hoping for women to rise up and make the unabridged "good news" so commonplace that men start diverting their energies from domination, aggression, supremacy and war to reconstructing our devastatingly dysfunctional society.
Did you know that in Australia we now have a 90% chance of getting and dying from Chronic Disease? This is due to our addiction to dysfunctional lifestyles and behaviours or actions. This in turn is due to low SQ (Spiritual Quotient). This in turn is due to ignorance of the healing message of the unabridged "good news". This in turn is due to the deliberate obfuscation and blinding of religion which persistently steals faith and salvation and perpetuates ignorance, addiction, blindness and dysfunction - by design.
_________________
(Psalm 68:11) . . .Jehovah himself gives the saying; The women telling the good news are a large army.
"The spirit of the Sovereign Lord Jehovah is upon me [Jesus], for the reason that Jehovah has anointed me [Jesus] to tell [the] good news to the meek ones [sheep or wheat]. He has sent me [Jesus] to bind up the brokenhearted [spiritually deprived and unregenerated], to proclaim [spiritual] liberty to those taken [spiritually] captive [by religion/ists] and the wide opening [of the spiritual eyes] even to the [spiritual] prisoners [of religion/ists]".(Isa 61:1 paraphrase).
-
cofty
ignorance of the healing message of the unabridged "good news"
So why do christians of all flavours get jsut as much disease as everybody else?
-
FlyingHighNow
So basically, Paul thinks the only reason God kept Eve on board was to have children. Since Eve had the "have children parts." Otherwise, she'd have been toast. Even though of course she was thoroughly deceived. Nizzze. I don't blame God for what Paul wrote. Men have always used fear to control, religious fear being the most effective. Men like to control women because if they control them they can get some nookie anytime they want it. Right? Also, if they control women then the men do not have to learn to get along and have real relationships with them. Then they can build Moose lodges or whatever kinda lodges and have all male bowling teams and have men as friends and women as convenient nooky and chief cooks and bottle washers. Oh yes and built in nannies.