A very recent one. http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... hp?t=10796
This one started lst November. Greatest I Am quotes from I Timothy.
Here is one defense of Christianity by a member of the Fundamentalist group.Timothy
2:11 Let the woman learn in silence, with all subjection.
2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to use authority over the man: but to be in silence.
2:13 For Adam was first formed; then Eve.
2:14 And Adam was not seduced; but the woman being seduced, was in the transgression.
2:15 Yet she shall be saved through childbearing; if she continue in faith, and love, and sanctification, with sobriety.
Allie wrote:I believe that women are equal to men. I also think that women can teach, hold authority over men, etc. I understand and have read what the Bible says on this subject.
I believe that there are principles under every commandment. These principles, when reading the Bible, are what I take away. Sure the Bible says clearly that women are under men, but that was in a letter to a church in a very different culture and time. Our culture today doesn't have anything close to that point of view. Back then, women were worth very little. It was disrespectful for a woman to have her head uncovered, or to talk in church. After they became Christians, women realized they were free in Christ, and it was true, but Paul was saying that we should not be a stumbling block for others. These women were hindering the gospel--not helping it. He was saying, in essence, "Be respectful! Don't divide the church!"
In our culture, saying that women are under men would hinder the gospel. If God wrote us a letter, I do not think he would tell us that women are under men, because that would definitely alienate people. I know it made me angry the first time I read it. However, now I believe that the principles need to be taken away: Don't divide the church, and respect one another.
Here, the case is made that we can ignore the biblical teaching because of a wider principle, another biblical teaching, takes precedence. Specifically, we can ignore the biblical teachings that consider women second class citizens because, in our culture, doing so would hinder the spread of the gospel.
From later in that same thread, here is another explanation which seeks to deflect the actual teachings of the Bible, again by trying to make the case that another teaching or principle takes precedence.
TMMaria wrote:catalyst wrote:
Quote:
Why go off on the bible when there's countries out there who treat women worse?
Well biblical concepts were the introduction OF this chauvanistic, mysogynist attitude.. THAT's why.
The WHY men would be chauvinistic and mysogynistic is because they selectively interpret the Bible with a narrowsightedness that erroneously justify their "lording" and "ruling" over women. We expect this kind of "chip of the old block." Sons of Adam took after the first Adam who stood by and allowed his wife to fall into the corruptive deception of an enemy stranger, then freely, willingly joined her in taking a bite of the yummy fruit and later cowardly used fingerpointing to lay the blame on her.
But the New Adam, Jesus Christ, taught them the servant leadership of washing each other's feet; when she's thirsty give her water...especially the kind of water to satisfy her to the point she'll never be thirsty again...love and respect her as He, Christ the New Adam, loves, and He stretched out His arms on the cross and died to show how men should love their wives.
If all men should love their wives as Christ loves, it matters not who is in the position of leadership...for He is there to serve and to love. The least shall be first, the first shall serve the least.
But as is, men continue to fail in imitating after the New Adam and continue to live in the Dark Age of the old Adam. They continue to lord and rule and abuse their women, and so the struggle for equality of the sexes and human rights in humanity continue to the end of times as long as there are men still yoked to the sins of Adam....and neglect to learn the Truth that Christ teaches to set them free.
Now, I do not necessarily disagree with the notion that some biblical teachings should take precedence over others, especially as I don't consider the Bible to be one self-consistent work. I do not subscribe to the notion that today's Christians need to follow archaic teachings that were given to ancient cultures in a different context.
I also do not want to oversimply and imply that those quoted above are generally representative of Christian views, even conservative Christian views.
However, I would like to suggest the following questions for debate:
How would members assess the biblical passages concerning women with those on gays or homosexuality?
Are the wider principles used to allow for equal rights for women also applicable to the issue of homosexuality?
Are the apologetics offered by Christians to support women's equality despite biblical teachings biblically supportable?
If these apologetic interpretations are valid, would this not also mean that similar apologetics on the behalf of gay rights should be considered just as valid?
To the extent that some Christians speak against equal rights for gays and yet accept equal rights for women, is this not an inconsistent position?
If Christians can allow "today's culture" to be a factor on how we interpret the Bible vis-a-vis women's rights, why not for gay rights?
