Quote# 15357

Joyce Meyers is a powerful teacher...so that logically means that women can teach men? That does not follow. Scripture is clear on the issue. Crustal clear. You have to explain away scripture in order for it to be alright for women to teach men.

This doesn't even begin to adress the OP's quote, which is scripture:

[bible verses]

I for one would much prefer to follow scripture rather than follow man's supposed wisdom on an issue as important as who is to teach. Everyone has their roles in the kingdom and we should strive to fill those roles. I will not be one who is sent away from Christ despite miracles and prophecies in His name! I would urge all to follow the clear teaching of scripture on this matter. [...]

Scripture is clear on the matter and mentions it in more than one place. I don't care how good a teacher Joyce Meyers might be she has absolutely no place teaching men.

Flesh99, Christian Forums 33 Comments [9/26/2006 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 4
Submitted By: UberLutheran

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 | bottom


So the scripture is \"crystal clear\" huh? Did it ever occur to you that, not only is the scripture wrong, but that there's no reason in the world why you should follow it?

9/27/2006 4:09:30 AM


Matthew 7:22 \"Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' 23 \"And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'

So if a woman teaches, then she and all the men she taught go to hell (?)

9/27/2006 4:14:50 AM


This kind of misogynistic garbage makes me wonder why any female of the human race can be a christian. If people followed, y'know, JESUS instead of the popular Paulian theology it wouldn't be as much of an issue.

9/27/2006 4:16:04 AM


Go fuck a handgrenade for being a misogynist fuckwit.

9/27/2006 4:23:02 AM


After all, it was Paul who died for your sins and who you profess to follow.

Oh? What's that? It isn't? Could have fooled me.

9/27/2006 4:52:30 AM


But wait, scripture also tell you, you can't eat un-kosher food, can't light a fire on sabbath, can't work on the sabbath, etc.

Not to mention going to the temple 3x a year with a sacaficial offering.

9/27/2006 5:04:20 AM


So if a man commands a woman to teach other men, then the bible explodes? Or does that turn into one of those double-standard situations where the woman just ends up going to hell, because Paul was a mysogynist?

9/27/2006 5:10:28 AM


Yet another reason why intelligent people shun the archaic laws of the bible, they were written by barbarians who were looking to control their followers. What better way to get half of them to fall in line then to silence them?

By the way, Paul was most likely a repressed homosexual, no wonder he had such a dislike of the fairer sex.

9/27/2006 5:28:04 AM

Napoleon the Clown

The Bible says a lot of stupid, barbaric, bass ackwards things.

9/27/2006 6:36:01 AM


Crustal clear, indeed.

13(X)For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.

This always reminds me of a joke I heard when I was a kid...

\"What did God say when (s)He made Eve?\"

\"Practice makes perfect.\"

9/27/2006 7:12:32 AM


Let's see, qualifications vs. mythological beliefs? That's a hard one! Someone who has studied for years, gone through on-the-job training, etc. vs. a group of stories made up by shepherds and townspeople? Hmmm?

9/27/2006 7:12:32 AM


Well that certainly makes things CRUSTAL CLEAR for me.
I love when people who clearly have no grasp on even the most rudimentry rules of logic, try to drop sayins they have heard around like \"that does not follow\". As if they have a clue themselves about what does and doesn't follow.

9/27/2006 7:28:40 AM


\"Crustal\" explains that you´re a moron and an ignorant who is UNABLE to understand that, even if inspired by God, it is A PARTICULAR MAN´S opinion, influenced by a particular place or time. Please, match evidence IF YOU WANT TO SEE THE REALITY.

9/27/2006 7:37:33 AM

Tiny Bulcher

Why is it Paul gets to trump Jesus all the time?

9/27/2006 7:47:48 AM


I seem to remember reading that lot of misogynistic comments of Paul actually probably aren't from him, but from church fathers that later inserted them there to get support for their asshatted ideas.
Can't remember where thou.

9/27/2006 9:35:42 AM


Back in the kitchen!


Just because you can't get laid doesn't mean that you need to take it out on ALL women.

9/27/2006 10:49:08 AM

Wolf O'Donnell (SWHQ)

This is one more reason why I hate Paul's guts. He didn't know Jesus, he fell off a donkey and then claimed it was because he saw Jesus and in that period he knew everything about him.

Christianity is a religion created by a drunk.

9/27/2006 11:38:01 AM

Mister Spak

\"You have to explain away scripture in order for it to be alright for women to teach men.\"


The bible is a book of nonsense.

Scripture has been explained away.

9/27/2006 11:45:51 AM


Ok, then, the people interested in learning can study with Joyce Meyers and the people interested in remaining ignorant asshats can run away as fast as they can. Work for you?

And what kind of name is \"Flesh\" for a good Xtian?

9/27/2006 11:50:32 AM

Irrational Entity

Puistokemisti, scholars do debate whether certain passages were inserted later, including ones limiting the role of women. Better evidence exists for tampering with names. Some translations of Romans 16:7 change a female apostle into a man.

9/27/2006 2:14:50 PM


Hey folks, check this out:

Flesh99 makes an honest confession later on in that thread:

\" I have prayed and still strive for understanding in the things I do not like. It turns out there were more than I first thought. I don't actually like that women are not to hold authority and believe me I would love to not have that responsibility as would many men but we don't have the choice. I would love it if my gay friends weren't living in constant sin. I would love it if I could get drunk whenever I felt like it. But these things are clear in scripture and like it or not we are supposed to follow them. Christianity is not a buffet where we can skip the liver and onions. It is supposed to be an all or nothing prospect. We fall short constantly but the goal should be to not do that. There are lots of things in scripture that lots of people do not like. There are lots of things that don't really make sense. But that does not mean we get to write them to feel good about ourselves based on a modern societal ideal.\"

It's highly likely the only reason he follows such a repressive religion is out of fear for being sent to hell. In that case, I'd feel too heartless for calling him a misogynist fucktard. His case is tragic. He's a victim of system beyond his control. It wouldn't surprise me the least if Pascal's Wager was his motive for conversion. It's more appropriate to pity him than flat out hate him.

9/27/2006 2:20:52 PM



Why did God make men before women?

Because every master piece needs a sloppy copy.

9/27/2006 2:21:51 PM

David D.G.

E.H.: Exactly. I know more than a few fundies, including ministers, who are filled with self-loathing inspired by decades of Bible-based brainwashing. They truly believe that humanity is scum because they have been taught to believe that they are scum -- but because they are \"saved,\" they believe themselves to be scum in a position to teach and uplift (or judge and condemn) other scum.

And these are the good ones, people of actually decent character for the most part, who are believing this tripe sincerely instead of just peddling it to achieve power! They're just trying to follow the rules that they believe in, and most of them truly think that they are trying to help when they try to impose those rules on others.

I think their continued association in such a sadomasochistic \"relationship with God\" has a lot in common with that of an abused wife who won't leave her husband and makes excuses for him about how she just \"falls short of what he deserves.\"

~David D.G.

9/27/2006 3:09:05 PM


I seem to remember reading that lot of misogynistic comments of Paul actually probably aren't from him, but from church fathers that later inserted them there to get support for their asshatted ideas.
Can't remember where thou.

Actually, there's a lot of passages in Paul's letters that apparently were inserted by later redactors, not only the church fathers (who have been attributed with the passage in Corinthians that prohibits women from teaching or speaking in churches) but some others as well. The very famous passage in 1 Cor 13 regarding love, read at so many weddings, is thought by some scholars to be the work of a redactor, and not Paul.

The two Corinthians letters are actually a huge mess because they're actually cobbled together from *several* different letters to the Corinthian church.

9/27/2006 5:20:01 PM


You have to explain away scripture in order for it to be alright for women to teach men.

OK. Scripture is full of shit. There. Done!

9/28/2006 12:44:56 AM

1 2 | top: comments page