WOMEN AND THE BIBLE

[n`gel]

---

I feel the same way here too manny. People's interpretation of what they read in the Bible differ, one verse could be interpreted by one as this, and the other not.

1 Corinthians, 14:34-35: Catholic and Christian churches who doesn't allow women to preach consider this as one of their doctrines. Catholic belief especially in Cathechism doesn't see this as literally be quiet but not to preach. Only men are allowed to preach. One other basis is that Jesus disciples were all men. And it was Jesus himself who gave them the final task of spreading God's good news after his death and resurrection.

If everything written in the Bible is attempted to be religiously followed, will cause more than confusion, because the entire book has very many contradictions. I advice Empress that you be careful with picking on Catholic belief if you yourself don't have an in-depth knowledge of their doctrines. There is more emphasis on the new testament than the old, because it's the reason why the son of God Jesus was born. As what bad donkey pointed out, the coming of Christ changed many things about the laws of the old testament.

The 10 commandments were combined into two general commandments. To love God above all things and To love your neighbor as you love yourself. Thus, making right the once old laws about many things.

[darkwing]

hmm Old Testament man to..

[glenn]

pwede mangutana?...la lang jud ko nakauyon aning style sa katolikong simbahan nga laki ra ang pwede nga magpari...di ba patriarchal system man na?...then kana pung bag o run nga patakaran sa santo papa na dili na pwede moserve sa misa ang mga babaye...ngano man na? la jud ko kasabot...naglibog ning tortogok nakong utok...

The answer would be......

1 Corinthians, 14:34-35:Â* "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.Â* And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Coz women should adhere with men ....... and Men should be the father of the family as like with the church, men should lead a certain congregation.......

[affable_chinky]

u know wat empress.. there are certain verses in the bible we cannot fully understand and translating it word by word would make our faith complicated.. that's why JESUS said happy are those who have faith in me even if they dont see me.. Even some priest also confused about the context of the bible, but they better leave it as it is and trust God..understanding the bible is truly unfathom.. that's why its good to study the bible...

[Empress_Of_Drac]

pwede mangutana?...la lang jud ko nakauyon aning style sa katolikong simbahan nga laki ra ang pwede nga magpari...di ba patriarchal system man na?...then kana pung bag o run nga patakaran sa santo papa na dili na pwede moserve sa misa ang mga babaye...ngano man na? la jud ko kasabot...naglibog ning tortogok nakong utok...

The answer would be......

1 Corinthians, 14:34-35: "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Coz women should adhere with men ....... and Men should be the father of the family as like with the church, men should lead a certain congregation.......

Basing from the verse you posted...it is very clear that the bible is a very bias book...

[off^tangent]

there's a striking similarity of customs and traditions between people of the Old Testament and Islamic people in the Middle East. like, men can have multiple wives, women are subjects of men,
ug pwede iuli ang asawa kung mahibaw-an nga di na diay virgin
or kung feeling lang nga di na gusto sa asawa
in fact, they share common historical personalities from Abraham to Moses, and they recognize Jesus but only as one of the prophets. for many, the OT is a 'book' of history that is common to the 3 major religions that originated in that part of the world, while the NT is a 'book' that teaches as it advocated a radical change of values.
As for the issue of the unfair treatment of women, historically it's not a religious issue but social because it existed before religion, and when religion came it has not totally corrected it. one religion did little about it, another did something partially, but only the politically-correct can totally eliminate it.

[n`gel]

Yup, that's the best explanation there could ever be Empress. Sabta na. Good job off^tangent.

[Cardinal Bunal]

Still, the Bible, when read in the proper context, gives a VERY HIGH place for women. One of the most important persons in the Bible was a woman: Mary, Jesus's mother.

And Mary wasn't the only one. (Judith 13: 18 )

[giver_bert]

apparently, a lot of times scripture is misinterpreted to fit a preconcieved notion...

they have been given such a discerning and sketchy treatment, usually being used to bolster one's point on a given subject rather than given a thorough analysis.. somehow it takes some time, rather than deciphering the verses literally.. and it may be a struggle on some cases when people have their minds made up about it, what it did, how it treated women, and what a christian should do with the it..

[HoundedbyHeaven]

[b]It\\\\\\\'s very clear that the Bible portrays women as inferior.

Who didn\\\'t consider women inferior in those days? You are ripping out modern-day social moral attitudes and applying these to ancient, Old Testament times-- it becomes ancient times versus modern times. Through the lenses of such attitudes, you measure the social moral attitudes in those days of old. It\\\'s like expecting ancient man to explain the Einstein\\\'s theory of general relativity and then hate him when he can\\\'t provide an answer. And that is clearly a wrong and unfair comparison.

Did you know how non-Israelite women were treated in those days in their respective kingdoms and empires? Had you compared these with how Israelite women were treated in the Old Testament, which you have caricatured in your post?

Did you know how slave women of kingdoms and empires other than Israel were treated in those days? Had you compared these with how Israel treated its slave women in the Old Testament, which you have caricatured in your post?

Why would a supposed \\\\\\\"loving god\\\\\\\" relegate women to such subservient roles?

God willed that mankind learn the moral law gradually-- not all at once. But yet some of the moral laws could not be established immediately, even in its most limited scope, out of necessity. For example, God cannot condemn as sin what we now call as incest until Leviticus 18. Why? How would the human population possibly grow unless Cain, Abel and Seth slept with any of their biological sisters, the very daughters of Adam and Eve (and some may even speculate that God could have allowed any of the sons to sleep with Eve and also Adam with any of his daughters?

The following are just a VERY few examples of the many.

Yeah, you can make a long list and misinterpret all of it.

Wives can\\\\\\\'t speak? Selling you daughter?! Rape is O.K.?! Auction rates for your family?!

You make it sound like the Bible approves the greatest social evils known to man, do you? You want to know the social evils committed by people who reject the Bible? Get the body count for Adolf Hitler\\\\\\\'s Nazi Germany in his attempt to establish a neo-pagan religion! Not satisfied? How about Josef Stalin\\\\\\\'s Communist Russia? Mao Tse-Tung\\\\\\\'s Communist China? Pol Pot\\\\\\\'s Communist Cambodia? The combined number of victims of these dictators is enough to make the number of victims of all the religious wars of the Jews, Christians and Muslims look like a fratwar-related violence.

The Bible is seriously screwed up! Not the word of any god I would subscribe to!

Thank God for the Bible!