Christianity and the Role of the Female

wellwisher said:
The golden generation from WWII era were not confused about the ability of women. The women of that generation essentially had to run the logistics of the country and the family, doing all the jobs men and women had done. Those women did this without all the modern rules and regulations; golf handicap of quotas. They proved themselves.

Say we assume women are equal, then is golf handicap of modern women, cheating? The older timers saw what women could do, so they don't understand the logic of the dual standard, since this implies less than men or cheating, but it does not imply equal.
Click to expand...

Come on WW, are we talking brute physical force or intellectual capacity?

If you have two people of equal ability in golf, and one gets a handicap of 10, this would be cheating. If you sincerely believed in equality then there is no need to give anyone a handicap, correct?
Click to expand...

Except that women in business are not given a handicap; the contrary is true, there are more obstacles placed in women's way, such as lower wages for the same job. It is the men who are given a financial handicap or women who are being cheated, take your pick.
 
Except that women in business are not given a handicap; the contrary is true, there are more obstacles placed in women's way, such as lower wages for the same job. It is the men who are given a financial handicap or women who are being cheated, take your pick.
Click to expand...

This is a common assumption that is sales pitched without the proper context. Women work fewer hours which is why they make less. Very few men will take maternity leave, which adds to their total hours. At the same pay rate, they will make more because of more hours.. Men get less time off than women which discriminates against men. Because women often want or need more time off, they pick positions that have more flexibility. The trade-off will not be higher wages but more flex time. The calculation I heard was if you factor in time and flex benefits, men may about 2-3% more, which is the small bonus for being expected to always be on the job.
 
wellwisher said:
This is a common assumption that is sales pitched without the proper context. Women work fewer hours which is why they make less. Very few men will take maternity leave, which adds to their total hours.
Click to expand...

I did. Most men I know who have had children have taken it. Where do you work?

At the same pay rate, they will make more because of more hours.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But women, on average, are at a lower pay RATE. So they make even less than you assume.
 
wellwisher said:
This is a common assumption that is sales pitched without the proper context. Women work fewer hours which is why they make less. Very few men will take maternity leave, which adds to their total hours. At the same pay rate, they will make more because of more hours.. Men get less time off than women which discriminates against men. Because women often want or need more time off, they pick positions that have more flexibility. The trade-off will not be higher wages but more flex time. The calculation I heard was if you factor in time and flex benefits, men may about 2-3% more, which is the small bonus for being expected to always be on the job.
Click to expand...

That is straw man argument and assumes that career women are necessarily married and are going to have children.

Why do women need more time off, exactly? What is "time off"? A business lunch with a prospective customer? An afternoon on the golf course with a competitor? Men take as much "time off" as they can get away with or justify as a business expense.

Intellectual value is not based on volume produced but on the quality of the product.
 
wegs said:
Looked up wellwisher's assertion...hmmm...interesting.
I didn't think that was accurate, but guess it is.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303592404577361883019414296.html
Click to expand...

As a retired bookkeeper I know wage structure and I know all the arguments, but that has nothing to do with equal pay for equal work.
A person working less hours should get paid the standard rate for the hours worked, not a reduction in the rate as well as in hours. Hiring temps is quite popular nowadays. I wonder why?
 
Going back to the original post/title of the thread...

Jesus showed a lot of respect to women, during his time. He actually preached the most to women, and it makes one wonder, if there were 'stories' left out of the bible, that talked more about women's roles, and if they would have had more of a prominent role in the early church. That said, the irony of that is many evangelical christians (and Catholic men too) twist the verse about women are to be submissive to their husbands, in order to support their controlling ways.

Here's the full passage reading:

Ephesians 5:22-33
New International Version (NIV)

22 Wives, submit yourselves to your own husbands as you do to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. 24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word, 27 and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. 28 In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. 29 After all, no one ever hated their own body, but they feed and care for their body, just as Christ does the church— 30 for we are members of his body. 31 “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. 33 However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband.

Often times, some christian men leave out the bit about...'men, love your wives.' Meaning, that if you treat your wife like crap, you shouldn't expect respect. I've had a few christian female friends over the years who had total dictators for husbands, who totally twisted this passage to condone their controlling behaviors.

The irony is Jesus treated women equitably, it seemed.

Then, you have those same christian men who twist the bible, to condone not permitting their wives to work outside of the home. Let's look at these passages, that basically imply that women should be taking care of their men, and raising kids. And should be silent in churches! Being a mother is an amazing endeavor...an awesome privilege. But, it shouldn't make it sound like if a woman chooses to work and raise a family, she somehow isn't a 'good' christian.

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Women-Working/

But, then we see this:

http://newlife.id.au/equality-and-gender-issues/new-testament-working-women/


Conflicting messages, no?

Being a believer in God...I've often wondered why Paul seemed so sexist? Jesus never spoke like he did, yet he became the 'spokesman' for Christ? :confused:

I also can't help but wonder if Jesus were to appear for the first time today...if the Bible would not look REMOTELY like it does now, complete with all the passages about women shouldn't be doing this or that.

Things that make you go hmmm. :shrug:
 
Write4U said:
As a retired bookkeeper I know wage structure and I know all the arguments, but that has nothing to do with equal pay for equal work.
A person working less hours should get paid the standard rate for the hours worked, not a reduction in the rate as well as in hours. Hiring temps is quite popular nowadays. I wonder why?
Click to expand...

for a number of reasons, yes, i know...not the least being not having to pay them benefits.
 
wegs said:
.....

Being a believer in God...I've often wondered why Paul seemed so sexist? Jesus never spoke like he did, yet he became the 'spokesman' for Christ? :confused:

I also can't help but wonder if Jesus were to appear for the first time today...if the Bible would not look REMOTELY like it does now, complete with all the passages about women shouldn't be doing this or that.

Things that make you go hmmm. :shrug:
Click to expand...
I agree with what you have said and commend you on your stance. The writers like Paul were influenced by the culture at that time. Obviously people like Aristotle had a lot to do with setting cultural norms.
But when I looked into the problem years ago, the solution is still there (New Testament) and it allows for a more democratic Church that is changing along with modern society, with very few of the old rules still binding us today.
Those rules were for then, but a new set can be established today. I'm sure they would reflect the characteristics of Jesus more closely.
I feel he was ahead of his time.
 
wegs said:
Things that make you go hmmm. :shrug:
Click to expand...

If you want to get your hair blown back (which is "hmmm" x 10) see if you can make your way through the following video series: Excavating the Empty Tomb.

The most compelling material presented is from a book called The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark written by Dennis R. MacDonald. This book has been reviewed at length by Richard Carrier here (in case you want an additional perspective on it's content without having to acquire it).

I'm certainly not telling you what you think, or what to conclude, but what I will say is that there is a world of perspective out there that a lot of people have barely seen yet, and it all comes to bear on how one should approach books like the Bible when wrestling with issues like the ones you are discussing here.
 
Robittybob1 said:
I agree with what you have said and commend you on your stance. The writers like Paul were influenced by the culture at that time. Obviously people like Aristotle had a lot to do with setting cultural norms.
But when I looked into the problem years ago, the solution is still there (New Testament) and it allows for a more democratic Church that is changing along with modern society, with very few of the old rules still binding us today.
Those rules were for then, but a new set can be established today. I'm sure they would reflect the characteristics of Jesus more closely.
I feel he was ahead of his time.
Click to expand...

I will come back to this...because its important this point u make. Doesn't it make you wonder why men of the day decided to follow the "customs" of the day rather than Jesus himself? Oh wait...Paul was "divinely inspired" when he said women shouldn't be heard in churches. Oh wait...is that like the RCC when it said "only Catholics will go to heaven," claiming they were divinely inspired. Then, as part of Vatican II...they changed their stance and said, eh no, we don't know who will go to heaven. Suffice to say, men and I do mean men ...have been making up rules to keep women down for centuries. And shame on them for using God to do it!

And that can be seen in ALL religions. ALL of them seem to 'celebrate' oppression of women, as if women should be thrilled to be oppressed. Oh, but of course, it's not painted that way. It (Christianity) is taught to women (it was taught to me) as...'faith is but a mystery, who are we to question God?'

Rav said:
If you want to get your hair blown back (which is "hmmm" x 10) see if you can make your way through the following video series: Excavating the Empty Tomb.

The most compelling material presented is from a book called The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark written by Dennis R. MacDonald. This book has been reviewed at length by Richard Carrier here (in case you want an additional perspective on it's content without having to acquire it).

I'm certainly not telling you what you think, or what to conclude, but what I will say is that there is a world of perspective out there that a lot of people have barely seen yet, and it all comes to bear on how one should approach books like the Bible when wrestling with issues like the ones you are discussing here.
Click to expand...

Hey!
I will check it out for sure thank you!
wellwisher said:
Currently more women are in college than men. Are quotas needed or do women prefer the dual standard?
Click to expand...

On average there might be a dual standard but I get paid in line with the men I work with and always have.
I've never felt personally discriminated I have to say, but female friends of mine have been paid lower than their male peers doing the same job...and even working longer hours. Have to keep fighting the good fight!
 
wegs said:
I will come back to this...because its important this point u make. Doesn't it make you wonder why men of the day decided to follow the "customs" of the day rather than Jesus himself? Oh wait...Paul was "divinely inspired" when he said women shouldn't be heard in churches. Oh wait...is that like the RCC when it said "only Catholics will go to heaven," claiming they were divinely inspired. Then, as part of Vatican II...they changed their stance and said, eh no, we don't know who will go to heaven. Suffice to say, men and I do mean men ...have been making up rules to keep women down for centuries. And shame on them for using God to do it!

And that can be seen in ALL religions. ALL of them seem to 'celebrate' oppression of women, as if women should be thrilled to be oppressed. Oh, but of course, it's not painted that way. It (Christianity) is taught to women (it was taught to me) as...'faith is but a mystery, who are we to question God?' .....
Click to expand...

Jesus was a Jew, so was Paul going to tell the Greeks and the Romans and all the other nationalities to become Jews in order to become Christian. They all resisted that for they weren't circumcised and those sort of things. They established a few essential concepts and allowed the main part of the various cultures to carry on. For instance we eat bacon but Jesus didn't. We can't be exactly like Jesus and his culture, but why should the Catholics be forced to adopt the Greek culture of the first century?

OK imagine if the RCC agreed to change and to modernize, it would then be a fluid code of conduct, but who would set it? How would you reset it? Single sex marriages in or out?
So many difficult questions.
 
Robittybob1 said:
Jesus was a Jew, so was Paul going to tell the Greeks and the Romans and all the other nationalities to become Jews in order to become Christian. They all resisted that for they weren't circumcised and those sort of things. They established a few essential concepts and allowed the main part of the various cultures to carry on. For instance we eat bacon but Jesus didn't. We can't be exactly like Jesus and his culture, but why should the Catholics be forced to adopt the Greek culture of the first century?

OK imagine if the RCC agreed to change and to modernize, it would then be a fluid code of conduct, but who would set it? How would you reset it? Single sex marriages in or out?
So many difficult questions.
Click to expand...

Jesus didn't oppress women. His followers did. That would mean that they thought they knew better than their leader.
Such is 'religion.' I mention legalism and such in Jan Ardena's thread...
Funny how it keeps coming up in other threads! :p
 
wegs said:
Jesus didn't oppress women. His followers did. That would mean that they thought they knew better than their leader.
Such is 'religion.' I mention legalism and such in Jan Ardena's thread...
Funny how it keeps coming up in other threads! :p
Click to expand...
What happened?
Do you want to know what the professor said?

These are very complex questions and its nearly 1:00 AM here.
 
Possibly, one the finest and most overlooked of the many various very important roles of women in Christianity, is birthing more Christians. Without women's vital role, in that respect, Christians may have went the way of the Brontosaurus or the Dodo Bird.
The world needs more good sincere practicing Christians or it could turn into a really ugly planet to live on.
The Earth needs more compassion, honesty, fairness, forgiveness, acceptance, and Christian Love. And women are vital, not just in procreation, but also in practicing and showing the benefits of Christianity to others!
Just imagine a world full of bias, deceit, lies,assumptions, false witnessing, false judging, false accusing and all of the other things non-Christians are oft to do.
Christians are a vital part of this world - and the woman's major vital role in Christianity should never be overlooked, denigrated, belittled or marginalized in any way.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top