Who knew sexism in churches still exists.

It's a church whose teachings are based on the Bible. Not sure why you expected gender equality.

Hypothetical scenario: you have two cups. One cup is a tall drinking glass, another is a beautiful, precious piece of porcelain. Which do you use to drink water every day? Which do you use for a special occasion? Are they equal? They both hold liquids. They can both do the same things. But still, there is an undeniable difference between the two.

This particular piece of porcelain popped out two babies without drugs and am working on a pistol squat.

I don't think you're getting full value if you save me for special occasions.

You just proved my point. Go tell your husband that he has to give birth next time.

Oh. I'm only to be used for the special occasions of giving birth?

YOU tell my husband that he needs to haul around the sand box sand next time. And maybe he can put together the play house too.

I mean, just because I do it better is irrelevant right?

Because I can have babies.

To the OP about the previous verses:

You have to take into account the cultural times. In those days the churches were split up Men on one side and Women on the other. The Women would ask questions during the service, because in those time they were not taught the same as men and they would interrupt and therefore they were told not to ask questions. The idea of submissiveness has been distorted. The Feminism in America has come in to turn it into something its not. That and men have taken it and abused it also. Yes a wife is to be submissive to her husband. But the husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church, meaning giving of himself to her and serving her by laying his life down for her and leading her. The submissiveness in the bible does not indicate men being superior but being created as the leader. There is a set up authority: God leads the husband and the husband leads the wife. The wife is expected to submit to her husbands decisions unless it goes against God and His standards. That doesn't mean she gets trampled on but to look to her husband as the leader as she looks to Jesus as a leader. God set it up that way from the beginning. The command goes both ways. The husband has expectations and so does the wife. But people want to have their own independence and therefore do not want to be submissive to anyone especially God. Its not really about sexism as much as it is about independence from how God created things to be and its not really an offense from the church as it is towards God who created things. People want their life apart from the authority of God and It just gets twisted by a fallen nature and distorted into getting upset at a prayer that ask for men to be what they were created to be and women to be created to be. I don't say all this to be arrogant or anything. I really hope it doesn't come off that way. I just thought I would share a different point of view

Well I for one and so very glad that I have my future husband to show me how to live my life. Thank god for that because gosh darnit, I wouldn't know what to do if I didn't have him guiding me.





There are about a million things that I severely disagree with in the paragraph that I have quoted. It literally makes me boil on the inside, I disagree so much. I want to hit someone.

It is not meant to say that women cant make it through life without a man leading her and in no ways is he supposed to tell her how to live her life. He is there to support her and lead her in the ways of God if that is how they as a couple chooses to live their lives. God gives everyone different strengths some women are surely leaders there is no denying that. I am talking in regards to marriage. You can disagree with truth all you want but that does not change truth. Im just trying to say that there is no reason that she should be so upset that a Church has printed a prayer for their congregation to live the way they believe the Bible tells them to live.

The problem is, it's just not the truth. I've seen marriages where the male seemed more the leader and some where the woman did, and of course then there is the third rail of this issue: Same gender marriages. :devil:

To the OP about the previous verses:

You have to take into account the cultural times. In those days the churches were split up Men on one side and Women on the other. The Women would ask questions during the service, because in those time they were not taught the same as men and they would interrupt and therefore they were told not to ask questions. The idea of submissiveness has been distorted. The Feminism in America has come in to turn it into something its not. That and men have taken it and abused it also. Yes a wife is to be submissive to her husband. But the husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church, meaning giving of himself to her and serving her by laying his life down for her and leading her. The submissiveness in the bible does not indicate men being superior but being created as the leader. There is a set up authority: God leads the husband and the husband leads the wife. The wife is expected to submit to her husbands decisions unless it goes against God and His standards. That doesn't mean she gets trampled on but to look to her husband as the leader as she looks to Jesus as a leader. God set it up that way from the beginning. The command goes both ways. The husband has expectations and so does the wife. But people want to have their own independence and therefore do not want to be submissive to anyone especially God. Its not really about sexism as much as it is about independence from how God created things to be and its not really an offense from the church as it is towards God who created things. People want their life apart from the authority of God and It just gets twisted by a fallen nature and distorted into getting upset at a prayer that ask for men to be what they were created to be and women to be created to be. I don't say all this to be arrogant or anything. I really hope it doesn't come off that way. I just thought I would share a different point of view

You're actually trying to justify turning an entire gender into followers and another gender into leaders? And this is okay how? The answer is, it's not okay. And no phrasing of it will ever make it okay.

That is not at all what I am saying. This regards to marriage. There are certainly some very strong women in leadership that I know personally that have helped me quite a bit in life. But they also know that when it comes to leadership under God, He made it that way for a reason and are not afraid to come under authority because to be given authority you have to learn how to come under it. That being said in regards to marriage it is absolutely truth. Whether people want to agree with it or not it is still truth. Just because someone says its not true does not make it any less true. Just because the truth is offensive to someone does not make it any less true. It just means they don't like the truth because it imposes on their life. Its funny to me how people can scream for tolerance for everyone but Christians these days.

Hypothetical scenario: you have two cups. One cup is a tall drinking glass, another is a beautiful, precious piece of porcelain. Which do you use to drink water every day? Which do you use for a special occasion? Are they equal? They both hold liquids. They can both do the same things. Equal and different, with the weaker vessel given preferential treatment, and the drinking glass used for its strength.

In my entire life I have never had someone call me a beautiful, precious piece of porcelain and then turn it around into something extremely derogatory.

Do you honestly not see how horrific that statement is? How condescending and extremely arrogant that was?

Me thinks the lady does exaggerate, would you say? Horrific? Poppycock!

Seriously, though, I'm a woman. I'm physically very strong, stronger than some men. So what? You get 3 straight guys living together, it usually smells like feet and cheese. Those three guys get married and their standard of living usually goes way up, whether wife works or not. It's called, "a woman's touch." It's a good thing.

First, the term poppycock is totally not used enough.

And I find it horrific because I am 100% for equality between men and women (and anything in between). I won't disagree that three straight guys living in a house together can be stinky, that is, at times, completely true (but the same can be said for three women), but I really dislike being labeled as something that is delicate and in need of a gentle touch.

You're a strong woman, I'm a strong woman. In the past men have gotten away with blatant sexism because they labeled us as delicate and inferior and not strong enough to do "men's work" so I really take offense to being labeled the same way now. They used those terms to put shields around us and we were not allowed to step out from behind them.

I am and will always be as equally capable as my boyfriend is and the fact that I'm a woman doesn't and won't change that.

You are completely entitled to your opinion. I have no issues with equal access and equal pay, but taking offense to generalities puts pointless stress on oneself. I am a strong woman, and I am stronger with my husband. He is a beautiful man, and he is more beautiful with me. There is no competition, no power struggle, when you can appreciate that.

I was raised to see other people as human first, and other things like skin colour, gender, etc as secondary. So I don't mentally categorise people according to gender, ethnic origin, sexuality, etc, because it makes no sense to me. People are people. Generalisations are stereotypes and when you question them, you find too many examples where they don't work. And when you examine racist (or sexist or homophobic) beliefs, you find that they are based on stereotypes.

Additionally, your generalisation about straight men... does that apply to straight men from all the various different parts of Africa, South America and Asia too? Or is it a generalisation based on a tiny number of men from your own culture? I've studied way too much anthropology to believe that anything in my culture applies universally to all men or all women, or all people of a particular sexual orientation.

It's a church whose teachings are based on the Bible. Not sure why you expected gender equality.

Hypothetical scenario: you have two cups. One cup is a tall drinking glass, another is a beautiful, precious piece of porcelain. Which do you use to drink water every day? Which do you use for a special occasion? Are they equal? They both hold liquids. They can both do the same things. But still, there is an undeniable difference between the two.

This particular piece of porcelain popped out two babies without drugs and am working on a pistol squat.

I don't think you're getting full value if you save me for special occasions.

You just proved my point. Go tell your husband that he has to give birth next time.

Oh. I'm only to be used for the special occasions of giving birth?

YOU tell my husband that he needs to haul around the sand box sand next time. And maybe he can put together the play house too.

I mean, just because I do it better is irrelevant right?

Because I can have babies.

He can't give birth. Men do not have this abilitity.

No amount of his exercising his feminine side will change that, just like no amount of push ups or putting playsets together is going to make you produce semen.

The very biology of men and women shows there are different purposes. Your strength and femininity is a gift. And a man's strength and masculinity is a gift. Just be happy.

I totally agree with you. My parents have a strong Christian marriage where my dad is the head of the household. That doesn't mean my mom doesn't have authority in her life - the president of Martha's Aid, Volunteer Program Coordinator, teacher, high school Sunday School teacher, reading specialist department head at our local elementary, community member and strong, opinionated, woman. Being a submissive wife doesn't make you weak - it makes you a partner in a marriage to a husband where you both love, trust, value, protect, and care for one another.

If you don't even go to the church, why would you care about the quote? Clearly it wasn't meant towards you, and you don't believe it, so why get upset about it?

Hypothetical scenario: you have two cups. One cup is a tall drinking glass, another is a beautiful, precious piece of porcelain. Which do you use to drink water every day? Which do you use for a special occasion? Are they equal? They both hold liquids. They can both do the same things. Equal and different, with the weaker vessel given preferential treatment, and the drinking glass used for its strength.

In my entire life I have never had someone call me a beautiful, precious piece of porcelain and then turn it around into something extremely derogatory.

Do you honestly not see how horrific that statement is? How condescending and extremely arrogant that was?

Me thinks the lady does exaggerate, would you say? Horrific? Poppycock!

Seriously, though, I'm a woman. I'm physically very strong, stronger than some men. So what? You get 3 straight guys living together, it usually smells like feet and cheese. Those three guys get married and their standard of living usually goes way up, whether wife works or not. It's called, "a woman's touch." It's a good thing.

First, the term poppycock is totally not used enough.

And I find it horrific because I am 100% for equality between men and women (and anything in between). I won't disagree that three straight guys living in a house together can be stinky, that is, at times, completely true (but the same can be said for three women), but I really dislike being labeled as something that is delicate and in need of a gentle touch.

You're a strong woman, I'm a strong woman. In the past men have gotten away with blatant sexism because they labeled us as delicate and inferior and not strong enough to do "men's work" so I really take offense to being labeled the same way now. They used those terms to put shields around us and we were not allowed to step out from behind them.

I am and will always be as equally capable as my boyfriend is and the fact that I'm a woman doesn't and won't change that.

You are completely entitled to your opinion. I have no issues with equal access and equal pay, but taking offense to generalities puts pointless stress on oneself. I am a strong woman, and I am stronger with my husband. He is a beautiful man, and he is more beautiful with me. There is no competition, no power struggle, when you can appreciate that.

I was raised to see other people as human first, and other things like skin colour, gender, etc as secondary. So I don't mentally categorise people according to gender, ethnic origin, sexuality, etc, because it makes no sense to me. People are people. Generalisations are stereotypes and when you question them, you find too many examples where they don't work. And when you examine racist (or sexist or homophobic) beliefs, you find that they are based on stereotypes.

Additionally, your generalisation about straight men... does that apply to straight men from all the various different parts of Africa, South America and Asia too? Or is it a generalisation based on a tiny number of men from your own culture? I've studied way too much anthropology to believe that anything in my culture applies universally to all men or all women, or all people of a particular sexual orientation.

You studied anthropology, so you know there are differences amoung cultures, let alone the sexes. And I studied biology. I'm not a doctor, but I'm gonna give a guess that stinky man feet or adolescent boy armpit is a universal thing.

To the OP about the previous verses:

You have to take into account the cultural times. In those days the churches were split up Men on one side and Women on the other. The Women would ask questions during the service, because in those time they were not taught the same as men and they would interrupt and therefore they were told not to ask questions. The idea of submissiveness has been distorted. The Feminism in America has come in to turn it into something its not. That and men have taken it and abused it also. Yes a wife is to be submissive to her husband. But the husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church, meaning giving of himself to her and serving her by laying his life down for her and leading her. The submissiveness in the bible does not indicate men being superior but being created as the leader. There is a set up authority: God leads the husband and the husband leads the wife. The wife is expected to submit to her husbands decisions unless it goes against God and His standards. That doesn't mean she gets trampled on but to look to her husband as the leader as she looks to Jesus as a leader. God set it up that way from the beginning. The command goes both ways. The husband has expectations and so does the wife. But people want to have their own independence and therefore do not want to be submissive to anyone especially God. Its not really about sexism as much as it is about independence from how God created things to be and its not really an offense from the church as it is towards God who created things. People want their life apart from the authority of God and It just gets twisted by a fallen nature and distorted into getting upset at a prayer that ask for men to be what they were created to be and women to be created to be. I don't say all this to be arrogant or anything. I really hope it doesn't come off that way. I just thought I would share a different point of view

You're actually trying to justify turning an entire gender into followers and another gender into leaders? And this is okay how? The answer is, it's not okay. And no phrasing of it will ever make it okay.

That is not at all what I am saying. This regards to marriage. There are certainly some very strong women in leadership that I know personally that have helped me quite a bit in life. But they also know that when it comes to leadership under God, He made it that way for a reason and are not afraid to come under authority because to be given authority you have to learn how to come under it. That being said in regards to marriage it is absolutely truth. Whether people want to agree with it or not it is still truth. Just because someone says its not true does not make it any less true. Just because the truth is offensive to someone does not make it any less true. It just means they don't like the truth because it imposes on their life. Its funny to me how people can scream for tolerance for everyone but Christians these days.

And... Saying something is the truth doesn't MAKE it the truth.

How do you KNOW it's the truth? What proof do you have?

Never going to work with christians. You are asking them to think. If it isn't in their book, it isn't possible. You will never get proof, because the only proof text that exists is their own text. You can't use the bible to prove the bible so they keep running in circles.

To the OP about the previous verses:

You have to take into account the cultural times. In those days the churches were split up Men on one side and Women on the other. The Women would ask questions during the service, because in those time they were not taught the same as men and they would interrupt and therefore they were told not to ask questions. The idea of submissiveness has been distorted. The Feminism in America has come in to turn it into something its not. That and men have taken it and abused it also. Yes a wife is to be submissive to her husband. But the husband is to love his wife as Christ loved the church, meaning giving of himself to her and serving her by laying his life down for her and leading her. The submissiveness in the bible does not indicate men being superior but being created as the leader. There is a set up authority: God leads the husband and the husband leads the wife. The wife is expected to submit to her husbands decisions unless it goes against God and His standards. That doesn't mean she gets trampled on but to look to her husband as the leader as she looks to Jesus as a leader. God set it up that way from the beginning. The command goes both ways. The husband has expectations and so does the wife. But people want to have their own independence and therefore do not want to be submissive to anyone especially God. Its not really about sexism as much as it is about independence from how God created things to be and its not really an offense from the church as it is towards God who created things. People want their life apart from the authority of God and It just gets twisted by a fallen nature and distorted into getting upset at a prayer that ask for men to be what they were created to be and women to be created to be. I don't say all this to be arrogant or anything. I really hope it doesn't come off that way. I just thought I would share a different point of view

You're actually trying to justify turning an entire gender into followers and another gender into leaders? And this is okay how? The answer is, it's not okay. And no phrasing of it will ever make it okay.

That is not at all what I am saying. This regards to marriage. There are certainly some very strong women in leadership that I know personally that have helped me quite a bit in life. But they also know that when it comes to leadership under God, He made it that way for a reason and are not afraid to come under authority because to be given authority you have to learn how to come under it. That being said in regards to marriage it is absolutely truth. Whether people want to agree with it or not it is still truth. Just because someone says its not true does not make it any less true. Just because the truth is offensive to someone does not make it any less true. It just means they don't like the truth because it imposes on their life. Its funny to me how people can scream for tolerance for everyone but Christians these days.

And... Saying something is the truth doesn't MAKE it the truth.

How do you KNOW it's the truth? What proof do you have?

Never going to work with christians. You are asking them to think. If it isn't in their book, it isn't possible. You will never get proof, because the only proof text that exists is their own text. You can't use the bible to prove the bible so they keep running in circles.

Jesus is his own proof. He is a historical figure that, while on earth, never wrote a book, went to college, led an army, hold office, or travel more than two hundred miles from his place of birth. He was born in a manger and preached his message for three years.

Here we are, thousands of years later, discussing him, while the kings and presidents and generals of armies have long been forgotten.