The answer for timothy 2:12
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-09-2012, 09:13 PM
RE: The answer for timothy 2:12
I have not read through the whole thread, so if this is repeating what someone else has already said, I apologize.

The passages in the Pastoral Epistles are 2nd and 3rd century forgeries, written in Paul's name to lend them implied authority, in order for the later Church to impose its will.

According to New Testament Scholar, Bart Ehrman, in Peter, Paul and Mary Magdalene:

"Paul for example allowed women to have significant roles. In his letter to the Romans (16:7), he names a number of highly placed women, including Junia, whom Paul calls “who are of note among the apostles.” Women play a role in services, 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. The author of the Pastoral Epistles is living in a different age, when women’s voices were being suppressed and their roles curtailed. In fact he explicitly forbids women even to speak aloud in church, 1 Timothy 2:11-15. These are views not shared by Paul, where he is remembered in a way that stands at odds with the real man of history."

Manifest Insanity @ Amazon
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-09-2012, 10:05 PM
RE: The answer for timothy 2:12
(26-09-2012 03:52 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(26-09-2012 02:33 PM)Godless Wrote:  King I see one very large problem with your argument. It makes total and perfect sense in the real world and is possibly the correct answer but it makes no sense if you have an omniscience, omnipresent, benevolent god.

Why? Simple. A benevolent god would never treat someone differently in regards to respect or responsibility if they were true in their intentions for good.

Wouldn't a loving god instead use these women to preach and spread his message by directly inspiring them as he did with the writer?

Why would a loving god go to such trouble as to inspire the writer to write such a letter then leave such hatred or disdain within the work when he could use the opportunity to tell women how to best use their skills within his framework?

Even if these women were notoriously loud and lacked understanding you could simply focus your wording to say "Don't preach if you are loud of tongue and lack wisdom of scripture." or something along those lines. Targeting a gender seems like the last thing a wise god would do because he would know the long term repercussions of using the wording that is currently in the letter.

We either have a letter that wasn't inspired by god (because how much sense would it make for only certain paragraphs or sentences in the letter to be inspired) or we have a rather short sighted god.

edit: oopsie no they are not easily confused and that was a horrible mistake Kingschosen actually has arguments and thoughts to present. Egor is a little more direct and unbending.

I have said over and over again that God is not omnibenevolent nor is completely bebevolent. In fact, God picks favorites and favors people.

The Bible doesn't convey God as completely benevolent, and I'm still at a loss as to where this incorrect concept came from.

If your god is omniscience and omnipresent but refuses to even help out the kids born with things like down syndrome with any kind of divine help then he's still a giant douche.

At the very least even if you weren't the nicest guy in the world wouldn't you have done something about things like AIDS, Down syndrome, Cerebral Palsy and the like if you had the power.

Many Christians (I don't know if you are among them) like to simply argue that "God's ways are above our own" but that's simply a cop out. Even humans have enough basic understanding of morality to fight disability and disease and consider that a good thing.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 11:32 AM
RE: The answer for timothy 2:12
(26-09-2012 08:28 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  But there was also meaning behind the question. Why do we even need to bother? I don't agree with Egor's "Atheism=Religion" mantra, but his actual stated reason, for me, has validity behind it: "If atheism isn't a religion then atheists would just go live their lives and not bother with any sort of God talk." (Loosely paraphrased but I don't want to search for the original quote). Anyway, the idea of less god talk resonates very strongly with the place where my soul would be if I had one.

Yes.
I most often don't bother with any kind of god talk unless it's contained in someone else's conversation and I happen to know something in that particular area of discussion. In fact, the most got talk I ever do or have ever done, has been is in this forum.

It is an ironic curiosity that there would be so much god talk on this forum. The irrelevance of the concept in my own life is most comforting. Shy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 03:28 PM
The answer for timothy 2:12
(27-09-2012 11:32 AM)kim Wrote:  
(26-09-2012 08:28 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  But there was also meaning behind the question. Why do we even need to bother? I don't agree with Egor's "Atheism=Religion" mantra, but his actual stated reason, for me, has validity behind it: "If atheism isn't a religion then atheists would just go live their lives and not bother with any sort of God talk." (Loosely paraphrased but I don't want to search for the original quote). Anyway, the idea of less god talk resonates very strongly with the place where my soul would be if I had one.

Yes.
I most often don't bother with any kind of god talk unless it's contained in someone else's conversation and I happen to know something in that particular area of discussion. In fact, the most got talk I ever do or have ever done, has been is in this forum.

It is an ironic curiosity that there would be so much god talk on this forum. The irrelevance of the concept in my own life is most comforting. Shy

You're swiftly converting me to apatheticism. Drinking Beverage

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 03:37 PM
RE: The answer for timothy 2:12
(27-09-2012 03:28 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  You're swiftly converting me to apatheticism. Drinking Beverage
Actually, I think it's more ignosticism which proposes irrelevance of the god concept ... but meh, either one, no biggie. Drinking Beverage

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-09-2012, 03:43 PM
The answer for timothy 2:12
(27-09-2012 03:37 PM)kim Wrote:  
(27-09-2012 03:28 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  You're swiftly converting me to apatheticism. Drinking Beverage
Actually, I think it's more ignosticism which proposes irrelevance of the god concept ... but meh, either one, no biggie. Drinking Beverage

That's too complex. I'd rather be apathetic.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: