Baptists divided over female professors teaching men

[pattimax]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Perhaps, but is it wise tradition?

Refer to #9
Before the Scriptures were even canonized, Gnostics were already twisting it to meet their own self-serving gains. No, there is not a shred of wisdom in this. On the contrary, it reveals that their distortion of Scripture shows thay have not a firm grasp of the truth (the apostolic message)and aligns them with those who say otherwise.

Any information on Tertullian would be very much appreciated.

[wil]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

There is one legitimate ruler. That is the husband. Show me an insignificant husband, and I will show you a dysfunctianal family, regardless of what the wife tries to do.

But he was President Q, and she may be as well....

[johnp.]

Hello Quahom.

Show me an insignificant husband, and I will show you a dysfunctianal family, regardless of what the wife tries to do.

I understand the expression, "She wears the trousers in that house." Is never said as a compliment. However, "He's a pompous so and so." Is also a non-compliment.

But it is rule, man's rule and woman desiring to ascribe to that position of rule within the family, that is what is meant.

That is right, women have been complicit in this, it suits many of them. 'Women will suffer during child birth and be ruled by their men and like it'. That people tend to rule those who are weaker is normal anyway so if weakness in authority is apparent then the other will take advantage of that.

We can see the lack of men ruling families in the Capitol of our country...

I don't know what you mean really. I suppose I imagine a dysfunctional family as the man beating the women and both ignoring the kids.

Are you Democrat or Republican? Will you vote for Hilary or Condoleezza?

There is one legitimate ruler.

My home is a republic without a nominated boss. I give way to my wife as she gives way to me. We are instructed to give way to one another. Eph 5:21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

john.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by wil

But he was President Q, and she may be as well....

ouch...

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by pattimax

Refer to #9
Before the Scriptures were even canonized, Gnostics were already twisting it to meet their own self-serving gains. No, there is not a shred of wisdom in this. On the contrary, it reveals that their distortion of Scripture shows thay have not a firm grasp of the truth (the apostolic message)and aligns them with those who say otherwise.

Any information on Tertullian would be very much appreciated.

Very little is known about Tertullian but from his own writings...except that he left the church for "heretical beliefs" in his latter years (he became a montanist).

It is presumed that he coined the phrase and concept of "Trinitarian" or Trinity of God.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by johnp.

Hello Quahom.



I understand the expression, "She wears the trousers in that house." Is never said as a compliment. However, "He's a pompous so and so." Is also a non-compliment.



That is right, women have been complicit in this, it suits many of them. 'Women will suffer during child birth and be ruled by their men and like it'. That people tend to rule those who are weaker is normal anyway so if weakness in authority is apparent then the other will take advantage of that.



I don't know what you mean really. I suppose I imagine a dysfunctional family as the man beating the women and both ignoring the kids.

Are you Democrat or Republican? Will you vote for Hilary or Condoleezza?



My home is a republic without a nominated boss. I give way to my wife as she gives way to me. We are instructed to give way to one another. Eph 5:21 Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.

john.

Interesting. I kiss the ground my wife walks on, because it's my word she obeys in matters of the family. She asks me how she looks and I tell her straight up if it is inappropriate for other than inside the house (and for my eyes only). When I am being in error in dealing with our children she is firm in letting me know (whether too soft or too hard). But we do not disagree in front of them.

Once she got mad when we were first married and declared she would dress as she pleased. I said "ok". Later that night when she came home from work she was in a foul mood. I asked what was wrong? "I got hit on all day long by these scummy men..." lol she listens to me now when I answer her on how she looks.

Woman is life and man is the servant of life, and as such is the protector of life...what he says goes for the preservation of life. What she say goes for the sustainment of the servant of life...(my version of Ephesians).

I was thinking of voting for Joe Leiberman and Carl Levin, should they run...they got lots of common sense and experience.

In our home I am the boss, and my wife backs me up...she helps me meet the needs of the family, hence the term "help meet" or "helpmate".

In matters of faith, we differ. However the kids are raised in my faith, yet have a good understanding of hers. There is no hushing about one belief or the other. That is ludicrous. Eventually they decide one or the other, or blend them within their own lives. As long as they are not void and have no guidance at all for their life ahead them.

v/r

Joshua

[pattimax]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Very little is known about Tertullian but from his own writings...except that he left the church for "heretical beliefs" in his latter years (he became a montanist).

It is presumed that he coined the phrase and concept of "Trinitarian" or Trinity of God.

Thanks. Do you know anything about Irenaeus?

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by pattimax

Thanks. Do you know anything about Irenaeus?

yeah, he hated gnostism.

[InLove]

Maybe it is because of my first name, but I often think of Deborah (of OT Judges). It looks as if she didn't do much better than many of the men, but I imagine that the people were glad she was there to handle matters at the time. To everything there is (y'all know the rest).

InPeace,
InLove
Debora (no "H"--Mom wanted to be different)

[pattimax]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

yeah, he hated gnostism.

...okay, thank you very much.

Karen

[seattlegal]

Please remember that Paul and Timothy mostly worked with the Greeks, and the Greek culture was very Patriarchial. A woman having authority over a man would be offensive in the Greek culture. The Christians faced enough persecution as it was, and having women in positions of authority would probably have brought more persecution on the Greek Christians.

[InLove]

Originally Posted by Seattlegal

Please remember that Paul and Timothy mostly worked with the Greeks, and the Greek culture was very Patriarchial. A woman having authority over a man would be offensive in the Greek culture. The Christians faced enough persecution as it was, and having women in positions of authority would probably have brought more persecution on the Greek Christians.

Precisely. And this, I think, is the reason for many of the things Paul said concerning women. He was, after all, trying to keep the ministry (and himself) alive long enough to make an impact. He was living in the middle of a political hotbed.

InPeace,
InLove

[Saltmeister]

Originally Posted by johnp.

Women are not a standard to be copied by men.

Oh no, I wasn't suggesting men should emulate women. But emotions aren't a woman thing. Metaphorically speaking, men are just beasts with feelings, beasts that are shy about revealing those feelings. These beasts can be aggressive, arrogant, haughty, pompous, self-absorbed and egotistical. But deep inside is a person embarrassed about being known by the world. It's a woman's mission to tame the beast by bringing out the real person. Men are masqueraders. A wise, insightful woman is needed to remove the mask.

There are plenty of men complaining about being misunderstood, by the world at large. They are told that they are a disappointment, that they haven't lived up to the standard of manhood. The world has expectations of them. Women have expectations of them. But they don't want to be judged by those standards. They want to be known for who they really are as individuals. The irony is that while we do want to be understood as people, we don't want the whole world to see through us. We choose particular individuals -- people we entrust to our inner secrets.

Originally Posted by johnp.

If men do not show emotion in the same way as women it is because that is normal for men, we are not lacking just because women want to talk about emotions and cry all the time and we don't.

If there is an upset what comfort is there in telling another person? Misery loves company?

But then, what's the point of having friends and companions? What happens to men in war? The man was not always meant to be a loner, going through life on his own. It doesn't always happen that way. Men do seek companions. It's not all go-it-alone. We don't keep everything to ourselves. We share our troubles with other men. Who is better at understanding men than other men? That's what male bonding is about.

It's not about crying and pouring everything out. That's not what mateship is about. A good comrade is not necessarily someone you pour your life out for, or one who does that to you. An article in the October 2005 (March 2006 issue for Australian RD) issue of Reader's Digest, "Big Boys Don't Cry" said that men do communicate their struggles, but with as few words as possible. The communication is implicit. It's not a normal mode of a man's behaviour to go into detail about what he's been through even when he is sharing something. So we share, but we don't provide details. We assume our comrades have been through the same thing and understand what we'd been through. We don't want to embarrass ourselves by explaining the details. So we keep our comments vague.

Reader's Digest Article:
Big Boys Don't Cry -- and Other Myths About Men and Their Emotions: Emotional Intelligence
Big Boys Don't Cry -- and Other Myths About Men and Their Emotions: The Crying Game
Big Boys Don't Cry -- and Other Myths About Men and Their Emotions: Guys, Try These
Big Boys Don't Cry -- and Other Myths About Men and Their Emotions: Women, Be Aware

The Crying Game
......As gender roles and rules have loosened, some men -- dubbed Sensitive New Age Guys (SNAGs) -- have dared to let their softer side show. But many men remain confused about how much they can dare to share. "In one breath a woman says she wants us to be emotionally open," says Westover, who is divorced. "In the next she wants us to be her rock. Women are asking us to perform these incredible emotional gymnastics, and it is messing with our heads. Men don't have a road map or a role model to show us how to be both emotional and strong."

That might be what distinguishes men from women sharing their struggles with other women. The communication, I suppose, might be more explicit among females. Women share more details, rather than taking for granted that the other party will necessarily understand. They're also not embarrassed about pouring out their experiences.

I don't think sharing emotion is necessarily a bad thing for men. Every man has something that he is proud of, despite his shortcomings and weaknesses. It may be his dreams, ambitions, aspirations, passions and inspirations. But this object of pride is a secret that only a man knows about. It is not shared. This secret object of pride is supposed to outweigh a man's failures, mistakes and defeats when it reaches fruition, is realised and achieves its full potential. All the defeats, setbacks, weaknesses and shortcomings were merely obstacles holding a man back from realising his mission. The man wants this to be understood. But the secret is sacred and personal. A man can't share it with the world -- only to a few select people whom he trusts.

I would think of the woman as a potential confidant. Men may have other men as comrades, but I doubt whether the intimacy goes deep enough. A wife is supposed to fulfil the role of the ultimate, ideal confidant. If a woman knows what this "secret object of pride" is, the secret, sacred passion that a man harbours within him, she might find it easier to love him for what he is despite the magnitude of his mistakes. But even if she doesn't know what it is, if she at least loves him, she also believes in him. Love is a belief in something. A belief in something wonderful and magnificent that you can't see, hence one's belief in (and love of) God. A truly loving woman believes in that something that the man is proud of.

Every man has a dream. Weakness is just an obstacle. A man isn't defined by his weaknesses. What defines a man is what makes him proud of himself, and this is more important than the weakness that holds him back. To focus on a man's weakness is to misunderstand the man. What one must do is dig deeper, and understand men on a more personal level than superficial elements.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

It's a woman's mission to tame the beast by bringing out the real person. Men are masqueraders. A wise, insightful woman is needed to remove the mask.

Actually, a woman can help to bring out the worst in a man--"the beast," as you have called it, but it is up to the man to tame his beast by developing self-control, which is one of the fruits of the Spirit. A woman can also help to bring out the best in a man in his successful struggle for self-control.

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

So we keep our comments vague.

As a woman, I get accused of being vague all the time. When words are inadequate to express my point, I can only point the way with metaphors and hope to stimulate others' minds enough to realize the point I'm trying to get acrossed. (If the others want to understand.)

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

The Crying Game
......As gender roles and rules have loosened, some men -- dubbed Sensitive New Age Guys (SNAGs) -- have dared to let their softer side show. But many men remain confused about how much they can dare to share. "In one breath a woman says she wants us to be emotionally open," says Westover, who is divorced. "In the next she wants us to be her rock. Women are asking us to perform these incredible emotional gymnastics, and it is messing with our heads. Men don't have a road map or a role model to show us how to be both emotional and strong."

Seeing a woman in labor, childbirth, and post-partum will show you that it can be done, {being both emotional and strong,} as johnp. mentioned in blue below.

Originally Posted by johnp.

That is right, women have been complicit in this, it suits many of them. 'Women will suffer during child birth and be ruled by their men and like it'. That people tend to rule those who are weaker is normal anyway so if weakness in authority is apparent then the other will take advantage of that.

Regarding the above part in red: What good is authority and control over others if one has not yet mastered self-control? That's what separates the men from the beasts.

[Francis king]

imho, men should be subordinate to women...