Christians that make up the laws and rules.

[vesta111]

So, what do you think of this.??

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07/09/vatican-rules-ordaining-women-priests-a-crime-like-sex-abuse-of/?icid=main|hp-desktop|dl1|link5|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politicsdaily.com%2F2010%2F07%2F09%2Fvatican-rules-ordaining-women-priests-a-crime-like-sex-abuse-of%2F

Just off the cuff I find this to be interesting as The Mother Church and members that put down the Muslim faith for holding on to a 1500 year old faith and calling them and their faith to Be barbaric in their man made rules and regulations, still practice their Christian  faith as it developed over 2,000 years.

The head of the Catholic church is voted in by mankind.  Once the voting is done then somehow a regular human is now somehow deemed to be infallible.  Who says that, why other humans, what has God got to do with all this.

To place the woman as beneath the men of the Church, not worthy to preach the word of God and compair that to the male Priests that distroy lives and get off on little kids, male and female is a bit of a stretch for me.

This thinking disturbes me,  Grown men who have been accused of unnatural sex crimes looking down on woman in general----They in their way are no different from the Muslim faith, woman are not considered as humans.-----

[franksolich]

Are you having a bad day, vesta, dear?

[vesta111]

Are you having a bad day, vesta, dear?

Not really Frank, I just get tied up in knots when I read or watch the news.

So much information that comes my way that confuses the Hell out of me, the going ons of the world and My Country that boggle my mind.

Human nature does not change, the more I read history the crazier it becomes.

When the time comes that I read or hear about life as it has all ways been and sit back and think, " OH well" that will be the time I give up my humanity and become a piece of rotting meat.

[MrsSmith]

The original news release... http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1002827.htm

Isn't it interesting that the minor mention of female ordination is the BIG story elsewhere?

vesta, you've read the Bible, and know that it says it is improper to put women in authority over grown men.  The natural order is that the man is in authority in the home and the church.  This makes sense because people are built to have a little more respect for a male authority figure...not because women have no worth.  The Bible also teaches that a woman's duty to her husband, and I guess therefore her minister or priest, is to treat him with respect.  Period.  However, the man is commanded to love the woman (or the church) as his own flesh, to care for his wife (or church) with as great an attention as he does himself, and to lay down his life for her (or the church.)  He holds almost all the responsibility.  He answers to God for every problem.

Now, I do think the Catholic church has some of this wrong, still.  The Southern Baptist consideration of this issue is that, by Biblical teaching, the pastor is the head of the church by being the servant of all.  Our pastors are church employees, and are hired or fired by the congregation.  We don't ordain women for pastors or deacons, but we have as much clout as any guy in the hiring or firing department. 

And the Bible also teaches that, while we are to respect our husband and allow him to be the head of the family, we are still co-heirs with Christ, adopted into God's family...in the only way that really counts, all of us are absolutely equal.

[ardentconservative]

The original news release... http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1002827.htm

Isn't it interesting that the minor mention of female ordination is the BIG story elsewhere?

vesta, you've read the Bible, and know that it says it is improper to put women in authority over grown men.  

 

Mrs. Smith, what the Bible says.  It is God that established the roles in the home and church.  It is God that said that the pastor is to be the "husband of one wife.".

Therefore, to me, the question is are we going to submit to what God clears says, or, are we going to argue with him because we don't like what he has decided.  

[vesta111]

The original news release... http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1002827.htm

Isn't it interesting that the minor mention of female ordination is the BIG story elsewhere?

vesta, you've read the Bible, and know that it says it is improper to put women in authority over grown men.  

 

Mrs. Smith, what the Bible says.  It is God that established the roles in the home and church.  It is God that said that the pastor is to be the "husband of one wife.".

Therefore, to me, the question is are we going to submit to what God clears says, or, are we going to argue with him because we don't like what he has decided.  

This makes me think,--- for a female to submit to male domenation be it Husband, Father, Brother, or Uncle , is to hand over all responsibility for themselves as adults.

No sense of self, everything they do be it the clothes they wear to the outside jobs they have must be cleared with a male family member.

Where they go, the education of the children and what to prepare for dinner is not her choice.----HIMMMMM sounds like a faith that we know of, don't you think.?

I watched as my parents and grand parents lived their lives, they are or were Christians, yet at no time did I ever see any of them living their lives by this mandate.

They all worked as a team, hand and glove with each other.  They lived their lives as one, no male or female was the Boss, there was great respect given to their spouse in their needs and wants.

As my father lay in a hospital bed dieing he voiced the concern to my mother of what the future held for them.  Mom without a blink told him that she would care for him and they needed to  continue to work as a team through the difficult days ahead. They did and he lived for another year after.

Woman have to be able to put their foot down on a husband when they see their husband is acting out, perhaps doing things that will endanger her and their children. 

Not every married man is in total controll of themselves, read the town newspapers. Not every woman is a good mother or great wife, there are too many ifs, And's and But's here when it comes to humane relationships.

Let me tell you , my sons are grown men and I still feel free to call them out from time to time.

If my neighbor is beating his dog or kids with a 2x4 you bet I will jump in there not giving a damn what God said about anything. If his wife hides saying that she can do nothing as he is the Boss, I just may end up in jail for a few days.

God has morphed in the old times, one day he allowed on thing and the other day he became in raged at the actions of men that he had been silent about for a few generations.

As we have heard nothing from God in 2000 years and society has changed, life styles and his Church undergone all the changes, I wonder how He feels about people trying to bring his age old word into a completely new world.?

I do hope God has not given up on earth, is that a tear I see in the eye of God.??

[soleil]

My church (Methodist) has a husband and wife duo as the pastors. They alternate Sundays. I love them both, but I actually prefer hearing the wife preach the sermon. She is a natural. She was born and raised Baptist. Converted later in life.

[soleil]

This makes me think,--- for a female to submit to male domenation be it Husband, Father, Brother, or Uncle , is to hand over all responsibility for themselves as adults.

No sense of self, everything they do be it the clothes they wear to the outside jobs they have must be cleared with a male family member.

Where they go, the education of the children and what to prepare for dinner is not her choice.----HIMMMMM sounds like a faith that we know of, don't you think.?

I watched as my parents and grand parents lived their lives, they are or were Christians, yet at no time did I ever see any of them living their lives by this mandate.

They all worked as a team, hand and glove with each other.  They lived their lives as one, no male or female was the Boss, there was great respect given to their spouse in their needs and wants.

As my father lay in a hospital bed dieing he voiced the concern to my mother of what the future held for them.  Mom without a blink told him that she would care for him and they needed to  continue to work as a team through the difficult days ahead. They did and he lived for another year after.

Woman have to be able to put their foot down on a husband when they see their husband is acting out, perhaps doing things that will endanger her and their children. 

Not every married man is in total controll of themselves, read the town newspapers. Not every woman is a good mother or great wife, there are too many ifs, And's and But's here when it comes to humane relationships.

Let me tell you , my sons are grown men and I still feel free to call them out from time to time.

If my neighbor is beating his dog or kids with a 2x4 you bet I will jump in there not giving a damn what God said about anything. If his wife hides saying that she can do nothing as he is the Boss, I just may end up in jail for a few days.

God has morphed in the old times, one day he allowed on thing and the other day he became in raged at the actions of men that he had been silent about for a few generations.

As we have heard nothing from God in 2000 years and society has changed, life styles and his Church undergone all the changes, I wonder how He feels about people trying to bring his age old word into a completely new world.?

I do hope God has not given up on earth, is that a tear I see in the eye of God.??

I believe God does weep at what he sees down here. It would be hard not to. Free will is not usually pretty.

[MrsSmith]

Vesta, I think you have an incorrect vision of the wifely submission thing.  We are not told to lay down and let him - any him - dictate our lives.  We are told merely to have respect for our husband - not any other male relative, except Dad - and I think that also extends to our pastor (recalling that we can fire him if he loses touch with theology.)  That in no way means that we clear everything with some male figure.  It does mean, however, that if, as partners, if my husband and I cannot agree on some specific issue, he has the responsibility to choose the best course of action...after due consideration of my needs and feelings - giving my needs and feelings equal weight with his own.

What I find VERY interesting...after having done some studying in secular self-help books years ago...is that the current marriage guides specify almost the entire Biblical deal...the husband must demonstrate love to his wife, the wife must demonstrate respect for her husband, etc.  They do stop short of the final detail, that he must take responsibility for final decisions...and their consequences....but the rest of it is all there.  When man gets around to figuring out the same things God told us thousands of years ago, it really makes a person wonder why they didn't just believe the One that made us all. 

In truth, given the potential for making incorrect decisions that is demonstrated by humans, I'd have to say the man got the short end of the stick.  All I have to be is respectful...I don't have to be nice and smooth over the problems caused by any of his incorrect decisions.   

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Maybe, just maybe, the whole no-female-priest thingy has nothing to do with males being over females.

Maybe, just maybe, it has to do with the fact that a priest represents God to man.

If so then a female standing in as the representative of God would cast God in a feminine context.

The ancients had to work very strenuously to avoid the imagery of female.

Astarte, Hecate, Cybele.

Not exactly the kind of girls one wants to bring home to a proper Jewish mother.

Remember, in the Bible, God is a Creator, not a mother. That is very deliberate.

[soleil]

Maybe, just maybe, the whole no-female-priest thingy has nothing to do with males being over females.

Maybe, just maybe, it has to do with the fact that a priest represents God to man.

If so then a female standing in as the representative of God would cast God in a feminine context.

The ancients had to work very strenuously to avoid the imagery of female.

Astarte, Hecate, Cybele.

Not exactly the kind of girls one wants to bring home to a proper Jewish mother.

Remember, in the Bible, God is a Creator, not a mother. That is very deliberate.

The Bible is up to each's interpretation IMO. Hence so many different religions. I have questions about some parts of the Bible at times. Doesn't mean I am not Christian, but it is human nature to question. And I am glad I do. Also, you have to realize the time in which it was written. It was written to stand ALL time, but you need to put into context what was the norm then compared to now. 2000 years changes a lot of things. We now have things that weren't even thought of in those times. I have NO problem with a woman standing on the pulpit preaching God's word. As long as the message as being spread, who cares who is doing it? And my husband and I are one.  We make decisions  based on what we both choose. If he ever went over my head because he is the "man", well I'd definitely have a problem with that. What makes a marriage work is 2 people working together as one. He has no authority over me because he is the man. I can see that dooming a marriage quite honestly.

[RightWingMama]

Well, just to add more fuel to the fire....

The Bible is full of examples of women being in authority. Off the top of my head: Huldah and Deborah. Paul told the Romans to do whatever Phebe needed them to do. Phillip had 4 virgin daughters who were prophetesses. Miriam was also a prophetess, as was Anna.

I do know that some of Paul's epistles seem to command that authority be given only to the man, but I read it as applying to very specific situations. Also, I read Paul's letters more like letters of advice and less like Scripture, and that'll probably get me flamed...

In regards to God not being portrayed as feminine, Deuteronomy 32:11-12 likens God to a mother bird who keeps her young safe. I'm not saying God was a woman by any means, but I think it'd be a little misleading to say at no point was God portrayed with any motherly characteristics.

[MrsSmith]

Marriage and ministry ARE specific situations.

[soleil]

Marriage and ministry ARE specific situations.

Please elaborate.

I am wondering if it is considered ok if it is a married couple for a woman to preach but not for a woman to preach on her own. If so, I'd like to know your understanding behind that.

I used to be Episcopal. And for the longest I had the same man priest. But when he retired, a woman took over. I understand the Episcopal religion is more of a "liberal" religion (at least for the most part), but I have to say I enjoyed the woman more. I have since converted to Methodist which isn't too terribly different from the Episcopal religion, at least as far as the ceremony goes.

[MrsSmith]

Please elaborate.

I am wondering if it is considered ok if it is a married couple for a woman to preach but not for a woman to preach on her own. If so, I'd like to know your understanding behind that.

I used to be Episcopal. And for the longest I had the same man priest. But when he retired, a woman took over. I understand the Episcopal religion is more of a "liberal" religion (at least for the most part), but I have to say I enjoyed the woman more. I have since converted to Methodist which isn't too terribly different from the Episcopal religion, at least as far as the ceremony goes.

A woman can teach co-ed classes, teach kids, teach women's groups, do really every job in the church except actually preach.  Married or not...or married to the pastor...makes no difference.  The pastor is male.  God did lay out different roles for men and women, and He built people with a different perception based on sex.  

With few exceptions...those exceptions being men henpecked to death...Mom can scold, snarl and punish miscreants with less effect than when Dad puts his foot down.  Even if Mom is scarier than Dad, Dad can still chill everyone when he chooses, and with less effort.

As unfair as we may think it, a man and a woman in authority that do EXACTLY the same thing will get different reactions...we are far more likely to see the man "being in authority" and the woman as a B____.  People are simply built to react different to authority depending on the sex.

Because of that difference, because the man is the one that is given greater responsibility, because the man is commanded to love instead of merely respect, because the man is the one through whom original sin carries, man must carry the greater burden of authority.

And we know when we're all doing it right BECAUSE it is a burden, not a power trip.

[soleil]

A woman can teach co-ed classes, teach kids, teach women's groups, do really every job in the church except actually preach.  Married or not...or married to the pastor...makes no difference.  The pastor is male.  God did lay out different roles for men and women, and He built people with a different perception based on sex.  

With few exceptions...those exceptions being men henpecked to death...Mom can scold, snarl and punish miscreants with less effect than when Dad puts his foot down.  Even if Mom is scarier than Dad, Dad can still chill everyone when he chooses, and with less effort.

As unfair as we may think it, a man and a woman in authority that do EXACTLY the same thing will get different reactions...we are far more likely to see the man "being in authority" and the woman as a B____.  People are simply built to react different to authority depending on the sex.

Because of that difference, because the man is the one that is given greater responsibility, because the man is commanded to love instead of merely respect, because the man is the one through whom original sin carries, man must carry the greater burden of authority.

And we know when we're all doing it right BECAUSE it is a burden, not a power trip.

I understand your husband is a pastor, but would I be correct in assuming you wouldn't attend a church where a woman preaches? Maybe not. I am really just asking.

I think I have read before that you are a southern baptist. Is that correct? I've been to many many Baptist churches. And yes, I have never seen a woman preaching. I live in the deep south where the Baptist religion is pretty prominent.

For me, I certainly don't understand that. I am willing to listen to anyone who has knowledge about the Word of God. Man or woman. I may agree or not on what they have to say. But it is all about getting the message out. Why is it ok for women to my missionaries? In essance, it is the same thing.

[vesta111]

I understand your husband is a pastor, but would I be correct in assuming you wouldn't attend a church where a woman preaches? Maybe not. I am really just asking.

I think I have read before that you are a southern baptist. Is that correct? I've been to many many Baptist churches. And yes, I have never seen a woman preaching. I live in the deep south where the Baptist religion is pretty prominent.

For me, I certainly don't understand that. I am willing to listen to anyone who has knowledge about the Word of God. Man or woman. I may agree or not on what they have to say. But it is all about getting the message out. Why is it OK for women to my missionaries? In essance, it is the same thing.

SOLIEL, I have a question and comment here.

I can understand where Mrs. Smith is coming from, the survival of the human species who depended on others to help them survive. 

Akin to the warriors in the past and today everyone is given a job, not allot of cross training, no time for that, everyone knew there place and acted accordingly. Each person was trained in a necessary job be it making flint spears to having exceptional eye sight to act as look out for danger.

Some one had to have the top place in all endeavors be it finding food, water, shelter, gathering and foraging etc.  Some one needs to be an expert to train and teach survival skills, be a judge over disputes and form ideas of a higher power to the people to keep them from going stark raving mad not knowing what to expect next or why what ever was happening. [Sort of like what is going on today with living under Obama ]

Men had the responsibility to hunt for meat, build a shelter for themselves and family, they got the back breaking and dangerous jobs.   Woman were the breeders and to insure life, were given the job of doing the non hazardous jobs staying close to home and took over the job of raising the kids, preparing hides, weaving flax for clothing and blankets and preparing a comfortable place for the men that fed them and their children.

The job of being the spiritual guide to the people was given to the men that could no longer due to old age go on the hunt.  Society could not afford to feed and cloth a male that could no longer do their job for any reason.  These were the Retired warriors that to insure their value to society that spent their years under the stars mapping the Sky's. These old timers were the people with time on their hands developed new ways of doing things and give a benefit to those that feed them.

What about the woman that were too old to be breeders or contribute to society, --------not a nice picture here.

So the traditions that led to survival are still with us in our society that no longer has the need to follow traditions 100,000 years in the making.

Today anyone male or female can go into the life of a Prophet, or Preacher with out having any idea of what is really going on in the world today for the common folk because they themselves have never been in the place of the common folk,.

They have never had to do back breaking work, hunted and killed both for food or other humans for defence.

These preachers have million dollar homes, and feel no shame when caught violating the 10 commandments.  They are still young enough to be of benefit to society in another indever but why should they, they have never done a lick of work in their lives and don't intend to.

We have a preacher in my family, he was in the Korean war and retired as a high school teacher.  He began his unpaid job after he retired,  he has something from the past to guide him on human nature, a good man.

His wife who except for his military time has been with him every step of the way, working at his school with him for 20 or so years.

If the time came when he could not for some reason preach on a Sunday and his wife had to stand in----no problem for me.  She perhaps has seen more of life then he  has from a different prospective.

QUESTION------

If you were really confused over a decision you had to make that would be life changing for you and family, who would you go to.?? 

 A 40 some old Paster of a Mega-Church that is constantly on a contribution drive, or a 75 year old female who operates a small Church, raised her own 8 kids and taken in 30 foster kids in her time ?

[Godot showed up]

So, what do you think of this.??

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/07/09/vatican-rules-ordaining-women-priests-a-crime-like-sex-abuse-of/?icid=main|hp-desktop|dl1|link5|http%3A%2F%2Fwww.politicsdaily.com%2F2010%2F07%2F09%2Fvatican-rules-ordaining-women-priests-a-crime-like-sex-abuse-of%2F

Just off the cuff I find this to be interesting as The Mother Church and members that put down the Muslim faith for holding on to a 1500 year old faith and calling them and their faith to Be barbaric in their man made rules and regulations, still practice their Christian  faith as it developed over 2,000 years.

The head of the Catholic church is voted in by mankind.  Once the voting is done then somehow a regular human is now somehow deemed to be infallible.  Who says that, why other humans, what has God got to do with all this.

To place the woman as beneath the men of the Church, not worthy to preach the word of God and compair that to the male Priests that distroy lives and get off on little kids, male and female is a bit of a stretch for me.

This thinking disturbes me,  Grown men who have been accused of unnatural sex crimes looking down on woman in general----They in their way are no different from the Muslim faith, woman are not considered as humans.-----

Vesta--however some religious teachings go, please observe that Islam is a political doctrine and it's been centuries since Christianity in any form had that kind of political power. While Christian thinking may disturb you, the reality of Moslem (Sharia) treatment of women as near chattel in many majority Moslem countries ought to disturb you much more than any religious preaching sans the power to enforce it. Do you see any large-scale or institutionalized mistreatment of women in the industrialized west, in what are predominantly Christian countries? No you don't. It isn't happening. When such instances do occur, they're isolated weirdo cults, hardly recognizable as Christianity at all and often not, really, and eventually draw the power of the civil authorities to break them up or flat-out destroy them (eg, the Waco Branch Davidians).

Talk is cheap, whiskey costs money.

Also, Christians (and many others) rightly condemn Islam as barbaric for many other reasons, eg, which religion is presently promoting and engaging in a violent war on the entire world? Which religion routinely inspires mass murder across the entire world, every day?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

The Bible is up to each's interpretation IMO...

Gosh, I hope not.

If the concept of divine revelation be assumed to be correct it provokes the question: Why? Why has a/the/some/all god(s) chosen to communicate with us?

I would presume it was because they had something important to say that we could not discern on our own. Leaving aside prophecy (which is like reading the last chapter of a book before you've read the beginning or middle) and surveying matters of morality and conduct: to say any issue required a divine nudge.

If I need divine intervention to correct my behavior it is because my own interpretation of what constitutes "best behavior" cannot be trusted. I can no more be trusted than a lifelong, but rehabilitated, alcoholic can be trusted to have "just one drink" at a New Years party.

I trust the Divine to be dexterous enough to communicate to me in such means as will best reach me but when it comes to matters of correcting my errant behaviors--the behaviors that prompted the need for intervention in the first place--the last judgment I should ever trust should be my own.

And I'm not so sure I trust the "2000 years changes a lot of things" argument either. The only thing 2,000 years means is 730,000 days have elapsed. To say 2,000 years changes anything is to say ours is the ultimate point of knowledge and what came before is waste brings into question where our wisdom will be 2,000 years hence. If 2,000 years makes the ancients foolish then we too shall be foolish when we become ancient.

But modernity has shown repeatedly that it likes to make ancient that which is personally inconvenient. No one argues against the "timelessness" of proscriptions against more heinous sins but that is because they find those proscriptions keep them safe in their homes and their spouses in their own beds. But work around the edges long enough and you will find even murderers and adulterers holding up scripture to justify their deeds.

This is not to say people cannot/should not learn. The hedge against women having spiritual authority has been used to marginalize women from roles where they would serve in stellar capacities, i.e. women have unjustly been relegated almost exclusively to homemaker status. Humanity would do well to educate itself and learn that it works to its own detriment to propogate such foolishness but then we must ask: was this relegation a matter of rightly interpreted revelation or was it the already corrupt leaning too heavily upon their own interpretations?

[soleil]

Gosh, I hope not.

If the concept of divine revelation be assumed to be correct it provokes the question: Why? Why has a/the/some/all god(s) chosen to communicate with us?

I would presume it was because they had something important to say that we could not discern on our own. Leaving aside prophecy (which is like reading the last chapter of a book before you've read the beginning or middle) and surveying matters of morality and conduct: to say any issue required a divine nudge.

If I need divine intervention to correct my behavior it is because my own interpretation of what constitutes "best behavior" cannot be trusted. I can no more be trusted than a lifelong, but rehabilitated, alcoholic can be trusted to have "just one drink" at a New Years party.

I trust the Divine to be dexterous enough to communicate to me in such means as will best reach me but when it comes to matters of correcting my errant behaviors--the behaviors that prompted the need for intervention in the first place--the last judgment I should ever trust should be my own.

And I'm not so sure I trust the "2000 years changes a lot of things" argument either. The only thing 2,000 years means is 730,000 days have elapsed. To say 2,000 years changes anything is to say ours is the ultimate point of knowledge and what came before is waste brings into question where our wisdom will be 2,000 years hence. If 2,000 years makes the ancients foolish then we too shall be foolish when we become ancient.

But modernity has shown repeatedly that it likes to make ancient that which is personally inconvenient. No one argues against the "timelessness" of proscriptions against more heinous sins but that is because they find those proscriptions keep them safe in their homes and their spouses in their own beds. But work around the edges long enough and you will find even murderers and adulterers holding up scripture to justify their deeds.

This is not to say people cannot/should not learn. The hedge against women having spiritual authority has been used to marginalize women from roles where they would serve in stellar capacities, i.e. women have unjustly been relegated almost exclusively to homemaker status. Humanity would do well to educate itself and learn that it works to its own detriment to propogate such foolishness but then we must ask: was this relegation a matter of rightly interpreted revelation or was it the already corrupt leaning too heavily upon their own interpretations?

Maybe I worded that wrong. The Bible may not be up to each's interpretation, but it IS interpreted differently by many religions and people. At least parts of it are. Who is right? Who is wrong? Or more likely who got it mostly right? Some interpret it literally all the way through. Some interpret it figuratively with some actual happenings in between. Some look at it as more of a guidance on how to live one's life.

I do think some twist it around to fit their lives to make them feel better about things they do. 2000 years does change a lot of things though. We now have cars, electricity, a bustling environment around us, etc. These things didn't exist then. So, what does God say about these things and how we should handle them? How it was perceived then in those times would be somewhat different than in today's time. But like I said, who is right and who isn't? That is up to us as individuals to decide with our personal relationship with God, IMO (which I think you basically said).

But I do believe some use religion or the Bible to hold some people back. We have to be careful of that. Which is why I have absolutely no problem with a Biblically educated Christian woman standing at the pulpit and telling me about the Bible. Afterall, spreading the word of God should be up to all of us Christians. But of course, like I've said before, there are ways to go about it. And then there are those who love to use the scare tactics.But that is a different story.

[soleil]

SOLIEL, I have a question and comment here.

I can understand where Mrs. Smith is coming from, the survival of the human species who depended on others to help them survive. 

Akin to the warriors in the past and today everyone is given a job, not allot of cross training, no time for that, everyone knew there place and acted accordingly. Each person was trained in a necessary job be it making flint spears to having exceptional eye sight to act as look out for danger.

Some one had to have the top place in all endeavors be it finding food, water, shelter, gathering and foraging etc.  Some one needs to be an expert to train and teach survival skills, be a judge over disputes and form ideas of a higher power to the people to keep them from going stark raving mad not knowing what to expect next or why what ever was happening. [Sort of like what is going on today with living under Obama ]

Men had the responsibility to hunt for meat, build a shelter for themselves and family, they got the back breaking and dangerous jobs.   Woman were the breeders and to insure life, were given the job of doing the non hazardous jobs staying close to home and took over the job of raising the kids, preparing hides, weaving flax for clothing and blankets and preparing a comfortable place for the men that fed them and their children.

The job of being the spiritual guide to the people was given to the men that could no longer due to old age go on the hunt.  Society could not afford to feed and cloth a male that could no longer do their job for any reason.  These were the Retired warriors that to insure their value to society that spent their years under the stars mapping the Sky's. These old timers were the people with time on their hands developed new ways of doing things and give a benefit to those that feed them.

What about the woman that were too old to be breeders or contribute to society, --------not a nice picture here.

So the traditions that led to survival are still with us in our society that no longer has the need to follow traditions 100,000 years in the making.

Today anyone male or female can go into the life of a Prophet, or Preacher with out having any idea of what is really going on in the world today for the common folk because they themselves have never been in the place of the common folk,.

They have never had to do back breaking work, hunted and killed both for food or other humans for defence.

These preachers have million dollar homes, and feel no shame when caught violating the 10 commandments.  They are still young enough to be of benefit to society in another indever but why should they, they have never done a lick of work in their lives and don't intend to.

We have a preacher in my family, he was in the Korean war and retired as a high school teacher.  He began his unpaid job after he retired,  he has something from the past to guide him on human nature, a good man.

His wife who except for his military time has been with him every step of the way, working at his school with him for 20 or so years.

If the time came when he could not for some reason preach on a Sunday and his wife had to stand in----no problem for me.  She perhaps has seen more of life then he  has from a different prospective.

QUESTION------

If you were really confused over a decision you had to make that would be life changing for you and family, who would you go to.?? 

 A 40 some old Paster of a Mega-Church that is constantly on a contribution drive, or a 75 year old female who operates a small Church, raised her own 8 kids and taken in 30 foster kids in her time ?

I would of course go to the person who has the most to offer. And to me, that would be the person who has lived a life, has the wisdom that only age and God can give you. I don't care if that person is a man or woman. To me that doesn't even begin to matter.

Also, I am not a fan of mega-churches. They just leave a bad taste in my mouth. Big time. Not to say that they are evil or anything like that, but when the preachers get so rich, and live in multimillion dollar homes, and have huge huge huge congregations, something about that stinks to me. I prefer for my preacher to know me personally, to know the whole congregation personally, and live a somewhat modest life. Not saying a preacher can't be wealthy, but when I see some of these mega-churches today, I always wonder if the preacher is still in it for God. Just me.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Maybe I worded that wrong...

Only as far as bunnies are concerned as we are quick to seize upon every grammatical nuance. So it isn't so much you as it is me. It stems from the theological maxim: never give a sucker an even break.

 

You do raise an honest point about how so many interpretations can arise from a singular source. It is one of the great dichotomies of Christian doctrine: it is not open to private interpretation --BUT-- justification before God is not settled with a No. 2 pencil and a Scan-Tron sheet.

If the bible were only the work of man such pehnomenon could easily be dismissed as the shoddy work of the authors...but that settles the matter so thoroughly it makes for boring conversation.

So assuming, for conversation's sake, the bible is divinely inspired what would God be trying to communicate to His creatures if He wants a purity of interpretation but does not demand you score 70% or better on a theology exam in order to enter heaven? We could say easily enough our ability to find so many interpretations stems from free will. It can also be a matter of exercise. Grappling, as it were, for the truth builds a stronger body of truth and the stronger and more able-bodied and unhindered you fellow contestants the stronger still you will become.

Certainly some exercises are detrimental but honest contests always improve you, even if you lose. It has always amazed me that the doctrinal overlaps among you Christians and your various denominations are so strong you have very few things to separate you at the end of the day. I conclude it's pretty much by choice the churches are so divided. I for one always found Catholics to be an inexplicable breed...until I read Aquinas and Pascal and Chesterton. Now I wonder what all the controversy is about.

[MrsSmith]

I understand your husband is a pastor, but would I be correct in assuming you wouldn't attend a church where a woman preaches? Maybe not. I am really just asking.

I think I have read before that you are a southern baptist. Is that correct? I've been to many many Baptist churches. And yes, I have never seen a woman preaching. I live in the deep south where the Baptist religion is pretty prominent.

For me, I certainly don't understand that. I am willing to listen to anyone who has knowledge about the Word of God. Man or woman. I may agree or not on what they have to say. But it is all about getting the message out. Why is it ok for women to my missionaries? In essance, it is the same thing.

We would not attend a church with a woman preacher...unless her preaching was limited to women's groups and children's church.  

I am Southern Baptist, and my husband is an ordained but not practicing Southern Baptist minister.  He gave up years of education and ambition so he could divorce his first wife, and strongly feels that he is not a proper person to minister or teach because of that divorce...though he will occasionally stand-in for a teacher temporarily (and does a great job each time.)  

A missionary is not the same position as a pastor.  There is no problem with women teaching...as I said in my previous post.  The problem lies in the woman being the "head of the church" or the "head of the man."  In those particular areas, God tells us that we are more blessed if we can softly submit at times instead of insisting upon being "as good as him."  We ARE as good as him, we don't need to win all the time to prove it.  We are co-heirs with Christ!  However, when it comes to some specific situations, it seems quite clear that God blesses both the man that carries headship with love and grace, and the woman that respectfully does not fight him.  

As I said before, these positions, if correctly understood, are positions of great burden.  Ministerial staff are under great pressure to be perfect at all times.  God has given us the option to skip that burden, and will bless us for doing so.  

I really did not understand the entire deal when I married my husband, and one thing I had taken out of our vows was "obey."  I'd been a tough,  independant, pushy, foul-mouthed single mom for years, and had no intention of letting any guy order me around.  In the 9 years since, I've learned a lot more about both God's intentions (as I understand them), and human relations.  99% of the time, my husband and I function as partners and get along great.  The few occasions when we can neither agree nor compromise, I have found without exception that my decision to allow him to carry the burden of the final choice has carried far more blessing and happiness for us both than early in our marriage, when I made the mistake of insisting on my way.  I have also seen the difference reflected in my children.  Even when he made the wrong choice, it ended up being better for us all than when I demanded the win.  I am positive that the basic differences between the sexes, and basic human nature, are the reasons behind almost every single commandment and teaching of God.  He made us, and He understands how relationships should function in order to provide the best to all of us.  Just as in all other areas of following Christ, we don't always like what we understand we should do, and we're not always instantly happy with the immediate outcome...but when we look back with some perspective, we can see that His way simply works best every time.

[soleil]

Only as far as bunnies are concerned as we are quick to seize upon every grammatical nuance. So it isn't so much you as it is me. It stems from the theological maxim: never give a sucker an even break.

 

Hey, it keeps me on my toes!! 

[Doc]

We would not attend a church with a woman preacher...unless her preaching was limited to women's groups and children's church.  

I am Southern Baptist, and my husband is an ordained but not practicing Southern Baptist minister.  He gave up years of education and ambition so he could divorce his first wife, and strongly feels that he is not a proper person to minister or teach because of that divorce...though he will occasionally stand-in for a teacher temporarily (and does a great job each time.)  

Our prior disagreements on theological matters notwithstanding.....I tend to agree with you on this, and I really can't explain why, other than the fact that I too, was raised in a Southern Baptist Church, and it just wasn't done......however, my wife and I attend a rural Christian Church now that does have a female pastor, and she is very good at what she does......I'm not comfortable with it in toto, but for a variety of non-related reasons it works for us from a theological perspective.

I'm not certain that I'll buy into the Biblical male/female role mandates that many Christian sects adhere to  because, as you and I have discussed before, I tend to view Scripture through a more pragmatic and interpretive lens than you do, but that is another issue.  Perhaps due to my upbringing, a male pastor just seems to be more "comfortable" for unknown reasons to me.

doc