Who knew sexism in churches still exists.

So I see that no one in this topic worships the God Emperor of Mankind. I have alerted the Ordo Hereticus and have requested that this thread be subjected to exterminatus. GOOD DAY, HERETICS.

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.

Um. So Mohamed and the Buddha have the same proof.

Mohammed was a military leader and Budda was a prince, so no, they do not have the same proof. Jesus is a unique figure in history, incomparable.

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.

Um. So Allah and the Buddha have the same proof.

But both of those have been proven to be dead...

Where is the power in a dead god?

There has never been proof that Jesus was not resurrected.

That's because there is little evidence that he existed to begin with. Hahaha. Other than one minor Jewish historian named Josephus writing in the mid first century, please provide proof that he even existed.

More books have been written about Jesus than about anyone else that has ever existed. I'll bet you believe Plato and Aristotle existed.

Has anyone ever played Cards Against Humanity? :devil:


*munches popcorn*

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.

That is incredibly sexist against men.

I have a good idea, let's take all the stereotypes about all kinds of people, and throw them all in a big skip, and then shoot that skip out into space and then nuke it, and start regarding each person as an individual human being, who may or may not have some things in common with other individual human beings.

Incredibly sexist against men? In my defense, what I said was true. Men are amazing. Statue of David? Absolutely gorgeous. Seal Team 6 were all men. Women are amazing. I think our debate about equal access and equal pay in this country has been extrapolated to a point of ridiculousness where just appreciating the different natures and actions of the genders is offensive. Ridiculous, IMO.

Straight men smell? Really?? You've met every straight man whose shared accommodation with other straight men and checked this fact for yourself?

My comment was about stereotypes. Your assertion that straight men smell... well that's a stereotype. Stereotypes are one of the foundations upon which prejudice grows.

According to the stereotypes, I'm a lesbian. Except I'm sexually attracted to men. So, there must be something wrong with the stereotypes.

Well, that explains your anger.

Regarding straight men, I think smelling is a universal trait regardless of sexual preference, once puberty sets in. Its why they make deodorant. A feminine tendency is to make the effort for a more lovely home.

And I bid you adieu. No offence, but you are making really random arguments. Unless you were joking.

I'm not angry. I couldn't really give a damn if people think I'm a lesbian or not (unless it's a man I want to have sex with, then I have a vested interested in him knowing that I'm straight). Some of my best friends (and one of my cousins) are lesbians. I'm just using myself as an example of why stereotypes are wrong, and frankly stupid.

I'm not making random arguments. You just don't want to question whether your "generalisations" are stereotypes.