[ Show ]
[ Shrink ]
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 12:54:09 02/28/05 Mon
Subject: Gender roles and the Bible
As suggested by Chris, I decided to take up the issue of gender roles in the Bible in the off-topic forum.
In response to Mike’s statement, “Frankly, I do not care for what liberalits [sic] would like to take out of the Bible.” Why be so close-minded? Our UBF experience has taught us that in order to come to the truth, one has to be open-minded. Also, you seem to be employing a type of black-and-white thinking - “any idea that ‘liberalists’ have is no good.” I must admit that I am guilty of a similar fault with respect to fundamentalists. But I am familiar with the fundamentalist arguments - I used to be one. I used to be on your side of this argument, actually. Anyhow, Mike, would it hurt to examine that you might be wrong about your belief about gender roles in the Bible?
In response to Mike’s statement, “By the way, I'm not a fundamentalists, [sic] however I'll quickly get enraged when people want to say that the Bible doesn't say what it says ad verbatim... this is how the Bible is turned from God's word into a fairy tale.” For my part, I’ll say that I get angry when people take the text of a modern Bible translation and think that they can treat it as if it was written today in modern language. That is what fundamentalists do.
On the other hand, a thinking Christian would read the Bible and consider that it was originally written in Hebrew and Greek, and it was written in a time and culture vastly different from ours. These things have to be taken into account before arriving to a conclusion on meaning.
Chris brought up a good point - what does it mean that man is the “head?” The question is not simple. Loads of theological debate has centered around Paul’s use of the Greek “kephale” in Ephesians.
I would give a point-by-point argument here, but I couldn’t do a better job than Glenn Miller, who tackles Colossians and the “headship” thing from Ephesians in this article: “Does God command wives to obey their husbands?” It is available at http://www.christian-thinktank.com/not2obey.html and is highly recommended.
I apologize for putting a bit of an edge on my arguments. I don’t mean to disrespect Mike, Chris or any other RSQUBF poster. It is just that I have noticed that “conservative” theological viewpoints seem to dominate on RSQUBF and I wanted to voice my disagreement. And even though I may continue to disagree with you on theological points, know that I am with you 100% when it comes to the mission and values of RSQUBF.
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |