Re: The New Covenant (using your verses)
Submitted by A.I. Watcher on May 25 2002 10:55:18
In reply to The New Covenant (using your verses) submitted by Splash! on May 25 2002 02:29:23
|
1 Timothy 2:12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. The word "over" means "beyond" and the word "silent" means "making no noise." A woman is not to speak beyond what a man has already taught (which would stir up controversy, especially during the time this was written); therefore, she is to keep silence (not cause controversy or "noise"). If we look up to verse 8 we find that man is to pray "without wrath or doubting." We wouldn't say verse 8 is sexist against males, so why would we when verse 12 tells women not to do something? It's sexist because it says that men are superior. Why SHOULD they speak first if a woman is ebtter qualified? Sorry, but this passage is pretty heinous. It's a religious excuse for the patriarchal domination of women. Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law-- a man's enemies will be the members of his own household. It's true that the sword that Jesus brings is one that will not bring peace, for it divides -- it divides the soul and spirit, and it divides people against themselves, even against their own household. This sword is the Word of God -- the Bible. But Bibles didn't exist for more than a hundred years after he said those words. It sounds to me like he really meant sword. Specifically, it sounds like that because he talks about not bringing peace. The use of peace tends to imply that what he's contrasting it to is an opposite. Thyen he goes on to talk about turning families against one another. Nothing in the surroudning passages contradicts his words. In the absense of contradictory evidence, doesn't it make sense to assume that Jesus actually meant what he said? What evidence do you have the the passages you cite, which were not written by Jesus, actually have bearing on this passage, that was? Luke 14:26 If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple. Jesus wants all of our personal commitment to Him. We are never to love anything or anyone more than Jesus -- not our families; not ourselves Yeah, but that's not what Jesus said - it's what you just said. Jesus said we are to hate our families. He was quite specific. If you suppose that his other words are to be taken seriously, why not these? Again, there is no text in te surrounding passages that modifies what he said about our hating our families. What evidence do you have that he didn't actually mean it? You have presented none so far. Matthew 12:31-32 And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come. Looking at the entire passage, we see in verse 24 that the Pharisees say Jesus is only able to cast out demons through the power of "Beelzebub the prince of the devils" and not "by the Spirit of God" (verse 28). This is the blasphemy of the Holy Spirit -- to claim that Jesus' power comes from Satan and not through the Holy Spirit of God. Yes, but that's not my gripe. I understand he's saying that no forgiveness is possible for this form of disrespect. Doesnt' that violate the precept of your faith - that all sins can be forgiven. And isn't more than a tad truculant of a supreme being to be so fucking childish and vengeful? That's what I mean when I say your god didn't change all that much for the better after the Old Testament. He's still frequently quite the asshole. Luke 12:47 "That servant who knows his master's will and does not get ready or does not do what his master wants will be beaten with many blows. Where's your disagreement with this? Isn't it true that many masters have beaten their slaves or servants for not being responsible in the care of their master's possessions? This is not a command for masters to beat their servants; instead, it's a statement of what happens when a servant doesn't fulfill his/her responsibilities. It's the implication, amplified by other passages about slaves, that slavery is OK. Seems to be a loving god would tell his created beings that slavery is worng and to stop it. Instead, he seems to encourage it. 1 Timothy 6:1-2 All who are under the yoke of slavery should consider their masters worthy of full respect, so that God's name and our teaching may not be slandered. Those who have believing masters are not to show less respect for them because they are brothers. Instead, they are to serve them even better, because those who benefit from their service are believers, and dear to them. These are the things you are to teach and urge on them. Once again, this is not a verse in favor of slavery. But if we are found to be in a position of "slavery" we are to show respect to those above us, so that God is given the glory for our Christ-like character. Even if we're in a position of "slavery" to a Christian brother, we are not to be angry with him and "show less respect," but instead we are to serve those Christians even better "because those who benefit from their service are believers." Of course it's in favor of slavery. Your god is telling slaves to submit to their masters, especially if the master is a believer. Why are you putting "slavery" in quotation marks. Is there some question about the definition? I don't understand your meaning. Mark 16:17-18 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well. In no way do these verses suggest we go around picking up snakes and drinking deadly poisons. These verses tell what will happen in the lives of true believers -- some will cast out demons, others will speak in tongues, some will pick up snakes and not be harmed (Paul was bit by a viper and didn't die in Acts 38), others will survive drinking poison, and yet others will play a role in healing the sick. I know, that's my point. It all sounds so ludicrous and stupid. If you drink poison, you will die. |
Follow ups: