Genesis 3:16 - As to ALL Women... or One Woman? A Favor, Please...

by AGuest 60 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  AGuest

  IMO the opposite problem is at least as likely. Ex-JW women may continue to act out the whole subjection role becasue that is how they were taught to behave from childhood.

  YES, C! AND ex-JW men may also continue to expect it! YES! This was my point, but on another basis: they probably do it due to conditioning, yes, but there are a lot of things we were taught to do by the WTBTS... and for some, this thing, perhaps all of their lives... that we still justify by saying it's "scriptural"... when it is NOT. Yes?

  If, though, one still sticks to unnecessary tenets, like being in subjection to men... and particularly men who AREN'T their husbands... and men requiring/expecting/needing such... are those who do TRULY free?

  Or is the WTBTS still holding some influence over them... whether they see this or not?

  Like I said, some thoughts on this came up in my mind and heart and I asked... and I received my answers. But I just wanted others who might need to to consider it for themselves. I'm not trying to get any wives to go on strike or burn their bras or anything like that. And I am certainly not saying men... and particularly husbands... don't deserve respect. Not at all.

  I'm just trying to get us to take a look at why we might still "fall" for something that has absolutely NO basis in the manner we were told it did.

  That's it, that's all.

  A slave of Christ,

  SA
• 

  AGuest

  Let the community decide whether you are Christian

  Ummmm... I don't think that's up to the community, actually. But I understand your chagrin about it. My advice to you would be to consider the words at Luke 11:13.

  or gracious.

  Well, I can answer that one for them: sometimes I am... sometimes I am not. I am not all the time, perhaps even not most of the time. But I have never said I was. "Graciousness" is one of those "social graces" that my father probably didn't teach me enough about. He was too busy teaching me how to change tires, change oil, change brake pads (AND brake shoes!), set timing... and rebuild engines... so that as small as I am I might not find myself stranded on the highway and have to rely on someone else to "rescue" me. Being gracious wasn't going to help me jump my battery.

  The Ivy League is an easy target for someone who would never be accepted at an Ivy, let alone do the academic work.

  (Smile) I was accepted to both UCLA and USC, Band, with partial scholarships to both... during my junior year. I was not your regular high school student but a member of the M.A.F.I.A. (Male and Female Intellectual Association), an independent study program because my GPA was 3.97-4.00. I never made it to either because during my senior year I (1) found out my mother, whom I had only gotten to know over the past few years, was dying of cancer; (2) was raped (by a fellow band member) and so got pregnant; (3) had my daughter three weeks before my mother died (who died on my 18th birthday, sorry); and (4) buried my mother a week after my 18th birthday. I chose not to abort my daughter or give her up for adoption... but to suck it up and take care of that little piece of life (who is now one of my greatest joys).

  You don't know me, ma'am. You don't know where I would be accepted... or by whom. Now, please... move on... before you get your feelings hurt even more. Because you KNOW you can't take it.

  A slave of Christ,

  SA
• 

  wasblind

  If the word subjection comes up in this house , Trust . The only "subject" that would be discussed is how he got

  out of arms reach unscathed

  .
• 

  AGuest

  LOLOLOL and I "hear" you, dear Wuz, girl (peace, my sistah!). Yeah, my dear husband is more my dear, dear (dearest) friend than a "husband" (as that word is often viewed by some who look beyond the civil contract and intimate physical relationship that makes him so: "You're my husband/wife and so you HAVE to..." whatever it is such one believes the other HAS to do... besides exercise fidelity, etc.).

  Thank you for your comment, dear one, and peace to you!

  YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

  SA
• 

  Bobcat

  AGuest:

  Your other comments re the WTBTS' views as to "all baptized males as having headship over females," is kind of what I'm talking about, too! Where did they GET that, other than their own false teachings??

  Here is the reasoning the WT uses to establish male headship over women in the congregation:

  *** lv [Keep Yourselves in God's Love] p. 210 Head Coverings-When and Why? ***

  Paul mentions the congregation setting, saying: "If any man seems to dispute for some other custom, we have no other, neither do the congregations of God." (Verse 16) In the Christian congregation, headship is given to baptized males. (1 Timothy 2:11-14; Hebrews 13:17) Only males are appointed as elders and ministerial servants with the God-given responsibility to care for the flock of God. (Acts 20:28)

  First they cite Paul's statement in 1 Cor 3:16. They do this first, whereas, Paul said this last in his discussion in 1 Cor. 11. This is a giveaway that their idea of male headship is manufactured by them, not Paul.

  Note their reasoning: 'Since only males are apointed as elders/ms, therefore males are heads over females in the congregation.'

  This is why I cited Numbers chapter 30 in the linked post. Paul was ground in OT procedure. In Mosaic Israel, only males were priests and leaders within the nation. Yet that fact did not give them any 'headship' over a widow's vows so as to be able to cancel them. After a women became a widow, she did not revert back even to her father's headship, let alone any headship of local leaders or priests. Those priests and leaders were only "heads" over their own wives and children.

  The statement in the publication that, "headship is given to baptized males," is a patently false statement. Nowhere, that I know of, are elder/ministerial servants referred to as "heads." Nor is the term "headship" ever used in connection with these duties.

  Thus, the WT's argument is a false one. And their quoting Paul's statement that 'we don't have any other custom,' is simply a thought-stopping measure designed to prop up an otherwise empty argument. And the falsity of their argument can be seen when it is taken to its logical consequence, which the ludicrous WT dutifully does, letting, yes, demanding, that baptized children act as "heads" over grown women.

  Take Care
• 

  Band on the Run

  Excuses, excuses. I can imagine this thread being submitted as an essay at any decent college. No!

  Most of us are way beyond the Biblical depiction of women. I am a woman and don't need scripture explained away to have a full life. We took to the streets and to the boardroom.

  Who the heck cares what the Bible says or what the Witnesses think? My faith tradition has female priests. Also, we now have gay bishops.

  This thread made sense in the thirteenth century. Birth pangs? Sheer stupdity.
• 

  Band on the Run

  What woman refers to birth pangs in today's culture. I know none. To use labor as an example of subjection is seriously flawed.

  Feminists worked hard and still work to bring a modern take on the Bible. Mary Magdalene never was a prostitute but a financial supporter of Jesus. No, I've been too personally invested in femiism to take this thread. Women move on, everyone else can follow. The sex roles in the Bible provide ample grounds to reject these teachings.

  No, Lilith is a role model. I do not physically crave a husband any more than men crave women. These scriptures are outrageous and to use them as a modern template for relationships between men and women is outlandish.
• 

  mrsjones5

  Hey! Here's a stellar idea: if you don't like the OP, don't post on her topics. Make no attempts of interaction. Don't even talk about her behind her back. Pretend like she doesn't exist. Whatcha think? Can you do it? I don't think you can but I could be wrong.
• 

  brizzzy

  Hey! Here's a stellar idea: if you don't like the OP, don't post on her topics. Make no attempts of interaction. Don't even talk about her behind her back. Pretend like she doesn't exist. Whatcha think? Can you do it? I don't think you can but I could be wrong.

  I don't have much interest in participating in this discussion, because pretty much everybody I am privileged to be close with would agree with the concise opinion Cofty has already voiced, so there is little extra I could contribute on that score.

  But surely, Mrs. Jones, whether Band likes the OP or not is irrelevant? Opinions were asked for; it is a discussion forum. Ideas will be challenged. "If you don't like the opinion/poster, don't respond" is a logical fallacy that seems to suggest that you feel an echo chamber type of environment would be more appropriate.
• 

  mrsjones5

  I agree Brizzy but Band doesn't like Shelby. She will never agree with anything Shelby says. Band only came here not to just voice an opinion but to fight.

  Crystal? Geez I feel like the board has dissolved into freaking high school. Pot shots all around. But ya know I'm too old for this shit. I've stated my opinion. You girls want to continue the fight, have at it.