WOMEN AND THE BIBLE

[Vertical Horizon]

---

God is simple.
you have to understand simply. you don't really need to understand the bible literally and figuratively to have a full understanding about him and his plans.
and i believe women are treated equally by God. You just have to think about Mother Mary.

[dmantilla]

Amen! Its true that He is very simple. Women should be treated equally and fairly. You can`t see the wonderful and beautiful world without your mom.

[HoundedbyHeaven]

\\\"Who is Keyser Soze? He is supposed to be Turkish. Some say his father was German. Nobody believed he was real. Nobody ever saw him or knew anybody that ever worked directly for him, but to hear Kobayashi tell it, anybody could have worked for Soze. You never knew. That was his power. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn\\\'t exist.\\\" The Usual Suspects (1995)

[mannyamador]

Amen! Its true that He is very simple. Women should be treated equally and fairly. You can`t see the wonderful and beautiful world without your mom.

That's right, and as far as Church Doctrine is concerned (as separate from private practices, etc.), they ARE. Women are not being deprived of any rights by the Church.

Take note, priesthood is NOT a right. It never was and never will be. It is a privileged vocation which persons are called to. No one can claim he or she has a right to be a priest. NO ONE. And since the Church is a PRIVATE institution, no one has the right to force it to ordain anyone it doesn't want to.

[amaw]

No, I wasn\'t questioning the date, and there is no doubt in my mind that you are referring to the \"Fall of Jerusalem\". What bothers me a lot is why the heck you blame a big part of the Fall of Jerusalem to past Roman Catholic leaders?

hehehe, I am so impressed how you twisted your story, after I mentioned "The Fall of Jerusalem", and wanted to get away with your first statement....well, cool.Â*

well, lemme see if you did your research......

Hey, the Lord Jesus Christ foretold the Fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD because of the unbelief of the Jews several times in the New Testament. Are you saying our Lord ought to be blame for \"playing a big part\" in the Fall of Jerusalem? For the death of a million Jews in one year, for forcing millions of jews, gypsies and pagans into slavery and for the mistreatment of women, ought the Lord Jesus Christ be blame because He foretold it? Seems to me that had not the Lord Jesus died on the cross, no Roman Catholic leader would have appeared to, as you fantastically put it, \"play a big part\" in the Fall of Jerusalem.

Jesus Christ said, somewhere in Mathew, that: No Stones left unturned..... would that mean 1 million lives were included?

Or are you claiming the absurd and incredible-- that the Roman army that came in and destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD were Roman Catholics? If so, boy am I glad we don\'t have the same history teacher!

hmmmnnn, you're trying to trick me by associating the words Roman Catholics.

OK, let's talk a little about history.....
Jesus assigned Peter to the responsibility of creating a Christian Church, which Peter went to Rome and became the first pope.
in 70 AD the Christian Church is lead by the Bishop of Rome, commonly known as pope, Peter's successor.... many years later a guy named Marthin Luther(not the American Black activist) questioned the church lavish lifestyles and created Protestant Church and separated ways.....

so, people are called Roman Catholics now instead of Christians, to isolate Protestants(and other religious denominations created later that are associated with Christianity) who can also be called as Christians....

Do you know Titus? if you don't then do some researching..... if you know, well, recent studies showed that this guy was even worshipped(not as a God, but as a saint) by Christians who look at the pope as the supreme leader, thus, eventually known as Roman Catholics.

[amaw]

If you understood what it truly means to be Catholic........

You keep mentioning if I really did understand the true meaning of Catholicism, yet, I doubt if you really do..... because if you do, then you would have explained in detail my questions about the the Church treatment towards women, the inconsistency about the bible.....not just keep on repeating your answer, as it would be very obvious, you're evading the questions....

well, that's really up to you....it doesn't matter to me anyways whether you'll explain or not.

[amaw]

Women are not priests because Christ is male.Priests act in persona (\\\"in the person of Christ\\\") Christi. A priest is invested with the power to transubstantiate the Host into the male Body and the Wine into the male Blood of the Lord Jesus Christ who is male forever and ever. God the Son came into this world as a male on purpose because He is to be the High Priest of the order of Melchizedek. This order and even the Levitical order does not ordain female priests.

Holy Cow!
You mean, women cannot play basketball because James Naismith, the inventor, was a guy?

I don't want to offend anybody, but that's really a pathetic explanation....

Since the Old Testament, God commanded men alone to be ordained as priests on purpose.

what naunsa na man ni?

I'm sure you're aware about God saying, " Don't put my name in vain"

And how do we know that Christ never made women priests? How do we know if some nuthead, macho guys in the past burned those scriptures that proved Christ made women as priests....so as not to give the women a chance to become priests forever?

Jewish and Apostolic Tradition. Since you are insinuating the possibility that scriptural proofs of the priestly ordination of women were burned, why not insinuate the possibility of the Lord Jesus Christ dying of gonorrhea as the Children of God sect claim? Or how about the possibility of His marriage to St. Mary Magdalene as Dan Brown portrayed in his novel? Or how about the possibility that it was really Judas Iscariot who died on the cross, and not Him?

OK, let's don't confuse ourselves between the removal and different versions of history, those 2 are totally different......
I'm talking about a possibility of removing a portion of history, and you are citing all those different versions.

For goodness sake, these vatican folks are the ruling body of catholicism, they can change the rule from married priests(and popes) to prohibiting them to have spouses and children. Heck, they can even make me a saint....... yet they cannot adapt the present situation by treating women fair and square, thus, giving them equal opportunities to become priests?Â* OHHHH NO!

Simple, the Lord Jesus Christ did not invest the Church with the authority to ordain women nor did the authority to apply politically correct egalitarian principles. The Church is a heirarchy, not a democracy. We are all subject to the Pope and the Pope is subject to Christ.

OK, I think my point is very clear above....... but for your own benefit, let me repeat it again....

OK, you said we are all subject to the pope, and the pope is subject to Christ, which means changes cannot be made without Christ's approval......which means in around 272 A.D. Christ came back to the earth, as after Pope Adrian II, popes are not allowed to have spouses and children anymore........ Is that your point? because Vatican changed the rule about popes unable to get married and have children around the time I mentioned above, so Christ must have come back to earth at that time, just to change the rule...

I\\\'m a man, and proud on so many ways of being a man, but I don\\\'t see any reason why we cannot treat women squarely by allowing them to become priests. And that\\\'s because the vatican folks cannot find any theological basis to support it.......Do you think that explanation given from the vatican is fair enough?

\\\"Rome has spoken, the case is closed.\\\" This was how the Church survived for two thousand years-- obedience to the Chair of Peter.

...... here we go again....
so Peter must have changed his mind after his death as popes don't have wives and children now..... long after Peter's death.
....ooopppps, and I thought, it's Christ's approval, not Peter's chair.

very funny.

Yes, men and women are different, but that doesn\\\'t mean we cannot give women equal opportunities.

Men and women are equal in dignity but their differences run deep. A priest is no different to calling a male child a boy or a son and not a girl or a daughter. It is no different to calling a male parent as father and not mother. It is no different to calling a male grandparent as grandfather and not grandmother. It is no different to calling the brother of your father as uncle and not aunt. It is no different to calling your male sibling as brother and not sister.

I fully understand the difference between a boy/man and a girl/woman....

But let me ask you, if you have a son and a daughter, do you give more privilege to your son compared to your daughter because he is a guy?

OK, I apologized.... I\\\'m just an ordinary guy reading a bible, understanding it the way how it is written. As of now, I guess I cannot really fathom the in-depth meaning of it.

Perhaps you can enlighten me, a lost soul, how to read the bible the RIGHT way. On the examples I\\\'ve mentioned above, can you please tell me how to read it the right way, or the true meaning on those examples, as I still found a lot of inconsistencies besides those examples, but that will be in another post..... Let us just start from the examples above.

And another question, how come we cannot find Jesus Christ\\\'s works in the bible?

What works?

His own version of his life and everything.... not just John, Peter, and all others' version.

Shalom.

Peace to you brother..... ohh, wait, are you guy?

[amaw]

Its really very clear on my message my faith and believe. Now, if you think that your religion can save you and its only your religion can be save..Heyyyy!!!!!!!! its not!!!! your wrong...religion can`t save you, but its GOD..If you believe that through your religion you can be save, so be it..Go for it...walay mamugos nimo..Kung sakto man gani imong gituho-an unya ako sayop awww!!!!! adto ko sa init nga lugar..pero kung ikaw man gani sayop unya akoy sakto awww!!!!goodbye bunot sad...Like I told you..magkatawa ra gyud ko... Kataw-an naku si satanas nga walay mabuhat kundili magcge ug panaot...

Well, if your message is like this.......

Your right!Â* I am laughing because I know that my God is a truly God..He is my saviour, my strenght and my shelter..I am laughing at Satan because he is just like you a small and a very thin dust...

I thought only God can judge, not ourselves judging others....

[amaw]

God is simple.
you have to understand simply. you don't really need to understand the bible literally and figuratively to have a full understanding about him and his plans.
and i believe women are treated equally by God. You just have to think about Mother Mary.

NO, I'm not questioning about God's treatment on women, I know God is fair...I'm questioning on the "CHURCH"'s treatment towards women....it's just unfair if women are not allowed to deliver a mass, cannot hear confessions.....etc.

what do you think?

Amen! Its true that He is very simple. Women should be treated equally and fairly. You can`t see the wonderfulÂ* and beautiful world without your mom.

yeah right, we keep mentioning our moms and women should be treated equally and fairly, yet we follow blindly(WITHOUT EVEN QUESTIONING) to the church's idea that woman cannot be ordained....double standards.... tsk.tsk.tsk

[amaw]

I hope this is not war between the sexes up to the point of calling God bias against females!

Did he come to save men only, excluding women?Â* Did he punish men only and not women?Â* Women greatly used by God:Â* Deborah, Esther, Mary, plus a lot more.Â*

Ah the numbers?Â* Not 50-50 right?Â* We have certain roles.Â* Men cannot give birth so he can't experience the pains of giving life.Â* Most women want their men to bear the birth pains, right?Â*

again, let me repeat it.... I'm not questioning that God is biased by gender....because I know God is fair.

But the CHURCH gives us rules that only MEN can be ordained and are allowed to become pope. For me that's unfair..totally unfair.

The Church should allow women equal opportunity and chance to become priests.

If you have a son and a daughter....and your daughter is very good in analogy, mathematics, and comprehension... yet through your generation, engineering is for men only...when you asked, and she said she wanted to take up engineering, would you allow your daughter?

If you're answer is YES...then I think you're fair
If your answer is NO...then I think you're treating your daughter unfairly.