quash said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

quash said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

quash said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

"For too many years, she said, she had stayed silent about the fact that women were taught that they mattered less to God than men did"

She is either making this up in her head or she spent years going to a church that does not teach the Bible or Christianity.

---

Sounds like she attended with Carlos Cruz.

---

Probably not. Women in my life know they are cherished. They don't have to be functionally similar in every endeavor to be special.

---

"There are reasons women should not teach men in church or have authority over them."

Telling them to shut up in church while doing all this cherishing is rank condescension. It is exactly like protecting women from the male gaze by covering them in a hijab. "For their own good."

---

You kicked the mess out of your strawman. Congrats.

---

I quoted you. Are you a strawman?

---

Thanks, T.S. Eliot

We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats' feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar

Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion;

Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdom
Remember usif at allnot as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men
The stuffed men.

J.B.Katz said:

---

This is why the Catholic church has lost moral authority:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/07/29/metro/defrocked-cardinal-theodore-mccarrick-charged-with-sexually-assaulting-teenager-1970s/?s_campaign=breakingnews:newsletter

If you are going to preach that women are second-class citizens and cannot be priests, you had better take seriously your duty to hold the male priesthood accountable for not abusing their children.

---

This ad hominen attack seems to be a weak attempt to hide the fact that you didn't answer my request for you to explain why the facts that I presented are incorrect.

You also haven't volunteered your "brand of Christianity." You may not be comfortable stating it publicly.

In lieu of your defense of your false claim, I will briefly answer your attacking post ...

First, I hope that "uncle Ted" receives the maximum sentence. He's been fully laicized. He will never be a priest again. The covering up of his sins sickens me and many other Catholics still today. He has done a great deal of damage to many individuals. If he doesn't truly repent, I strongly suspect he'll spend his eternity in hell.

Second, just because sinners exist in the church doesn't mean that the Church has lost its moral authority. The Church is full of sinners from its beginnings. Peter denied Christ three times. Paul hunted Christians. All churches have sinners. We live in a VERY broken world.

Finally (another request), please explain how/where the Catholic church "preaches that women are second-class citizens". The most holy (fully) human to ever walk the earth was a woman - Our Blessed Mother Mary. The church honors her greatly.

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

This is why the Catholic church has lost moral authority:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/07/29/metro/defrocked-cardinal-theodore-mccarrick-charged-with-sexually-assaulting-teenager-1970s/?s_campaign=breakingnews:newsletter

If you are going to preach that women are second-class citizens and cannot be priests, you had better take seriously your duty to hold the male priesthood accountable for not abusing their children.

---

This ad hominen attack seems to be a weak attempt to hide the fact that you didn't answer my request for you to explain why the facts that I presented are incorrect.

You also haven't volunteered your "brand of Christianity." You may not be comfortable stating it publicly.

---

Brand? Ask about essential articles of faith and odds are she's not a Christian at all.

Carlos Cruz said:

---

quash said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

"For too many years, she said, she had stayed silent about the fact that women were taught that they mattered less to God than men did"

She is either making this up in her head or she spent years going to a church that does not teach the Bible or Christianity.

---

Sounds like she attended with Carlos Cruz.

---

Probably not. Women in my life know they are cherished. They don't have to be functionally similar in every endeavor to be special.

---

Amen to this. Men and women are incredibly different. That we are different should be cherished because the God who created both, knew exactly what he was doing making us different.

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

And, yes, as I did say, they have to contort scripture to make the claim that Jesus instituted the priesthood. CokeBear's post actually makes that point for me.

If it makes you feel any better, Catholics aren't the only ones who contort scripture to "prove" a point of doctrine. Fundamentalists do it all the time.

---

Please describe how my post is contorting scripture. This is what the entirety of Christendom believed from more than 1500+ years.

I've stated my facts, please explain how they are incorrect. It would also help to know what type of Christianity to you subscribe to.

I'll extend the same olive branch to you that I have to others ...

If you're ever in Waco and would like to discuss this (or religion) over a beverage or two, please contact me. George's is open 6 days a week.

---

I don't get to Waco very often but I would be happy to buy you a beer at George's.

Will let you know next time I'm coming.

We can have a conversation about Mary, who had extraordinary faithfulness but who was an ordinary human being who went on to have a number of natural children conceived not by the holy spirit but with her human husband Joseph.

As to the point about Christendom, what you ignore is that before the Roman church enforced the secondary position of women, abundant evidence from the early church shows that women held positions of leadership and preaching. The Roman church tried to erase that history. Fact.

Another fact: Paul's own writings insisted that, within the Christian community, there was no distinction between male and female. It's in the Bible. More than once. I take Paul at his word.

You might also look up Saint Brigid of Kildare, a convert of St. Patrick who wielded the authority of a bishop under the Celtic model of Catholicism that was suppressed by the Roman church.

J.B.Katz said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

And, yes, as I did say, they have to contort scripture to make the claim that Jesus instituted the priesthood. CokeBear's post actually makes that point for me.

If it makes you feel any better, Catholics aren't the only ones who contort scripture to "prove" a point of doctrine. Fundamentalists do it all the time.

---

Please describe how my post is contorting scripture. This is what the entirety of Christendom believed from more than 1500+ years.

I've stated my facts, please explain how they are incorrect. It would also help to know what type of Christianity to you subscribe to.

I'll extend the same olive branch to you that I have to others ...

If you're ever in Waco and would like to discuss this (or religion) over a beverage or two, please contact me. George's is open 6 days a week.

---

I don't get to Waco very often but I would be happy to buy you a beer at George's.

Will let you know next time I'm coming.

We can have a conversation about Mary, who had extraordinary faithfulness but who was an ordinary human being who went on to have a number of natural children conceived not by the holy spirit but with her human husband Joseph.

As to the point about Christendom, what you ignore is that before the Roman church enforced the secondary position of women, abundant evidence from the early church shows that women held positions of leadership and preaching. The Roman church tried to erase that history. Fact.

Another fact: Paul's own writings insisted that, within the Christian community, there was no distinction between male and female. It's in the Bible. More than once. I take Paul at his word.

You might also look up Saint Brigid of Kildare, a convert of St. Patrick who wielded the authority of a bishop under the Celtic model of Catholicism that was suppressed by the Roman church.

---

You would talk about that at George's? I bet you are a lot of fun at parties.

Carlos Cruz said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

And, yes, as I did say, they have to contort scripture to make the claim that Jesus instituted the priesthood. CokeBear's post actually makes that point for me.

If it makes you feel any better, Catholics aren't the only ones who contort scripture to "prove" a point of doctrine. Fundamentalists do it all the time.

---

Please describe how my post is contorting scripture. This is what the entirety of Christendom believed from more than 1500+ years.

I've stated my facts, please explain how they are incorrect. It would also help to know what type of Christianity to you subscribe to.

I'll extend the same olive branch to you that I have to others ...

If you're ever in Waco and would like to discuss this (or religion) over a beverage or two, please contact me. George's is open 6 days a week.

---

I don't get to Waco very often but I would be happy to buy you a beer at George's.

Will let you know next time I'm coming.

We can have a conversation about Mary, who had extraordinary faithfulness but who was an ordinary human being who went on to have a number of natural children conceived not by the holy spirit but with her human husband Joseph.

As to the point about Christendom, what you ignore is that before the Roman church enforced the secondary position of women, abundant evidence from the early church shows that women held positions of leadership and preaching. The Roman church tried to erase that history. Fact.

Another fact: Paul's own writings insisted that, within the Christian community, there was no distinction between male and female. It's in the Bible. More than once. I take Paul at his word.

You might also look up Saint Brigid of Kildare, a convert of St. Patrick who wielded the authority of a bishop under the Celtic model of Catholicism that was suppressed by the Roman church.

---

You would talk about that at George's? I bet you are a lot of fun at parties.

---

They were invited to George's to have that conversation.

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

And, yes, as I did say, they have to contort scripture to make the claim that Jesus instituted the priesthood. CokeBear's post actually makes that point for me.

If it makes you feel any better, Catholics aren't the only ones who contort scripture to "prove" a point of doctrine. Fundamentalists do it all the time.

---

Please describe how my post is contorting scripture. This is what the entirety of Christendom believed from more than 1500+ years.

I've stated my facts, please explain how they are incorrect. It would also help to know what type of Christianity to you subscribe to.

I'll extend the same olive branch to you that I have to others ...

If you're ever in Waco and would like to discuss this (or religion) over a beverage or two, please contact me. George's is open 6 days a week.

---

I don't get to Waco very often but I would be happy to buy you a beer at George's.

Will let you know next time I'm coming.

We can have a conversation about Mary, who had extraordinary faithfulness but who was an ordinary human being who went on to have a number of natural children conceived not by the holy spirit but with her human husband Joseph.

As to the point about Christendom, what you ignore is that before the Roman church enforced the secondary position of women, abundant evidence from the early church shows that women held positions of leadership and preaching. The Roman church tried to erase that history. Fact.

Another fact: Paul's own writings insisted that, within the Christian community, there was no distinction between male and female. It's in the Bible. More than once. I take Paul at his word.

You might also look up Saint Brigid of Kildare, a convert of St. Patrick who wielded the authority of a bishop under the Celtic model of Catholicism that was suppressed by the Roman church.

---

You would talk about that at George's? I bet you are a lot of fun at parties.

---

They were invited to George's to have that conversation.

---

Do they get the Table of Knowledge?

Carlos Cruz said:

---

Forest Bueller_bf said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

And, yes, as I did say, they have to contort scripture to make the claim that Jesus instituted the priesthood. CokeBear's post actually makes that point for me.

If it makes you feel any better, Catholics aren't the only ones who contort scripture to "prove" a point of doctrine. Fundamentalists do it all the time.

---

Please describe how my post is contorting scripture. This is what the entirety of Christendom believed from more than 1500+ years.

I've stated my facts, please explain how they are incorrect. It would also help to know what type of Christianity to you subscribe to.

I'll extend the same olive branch to you that I have to others ...

If you're ever in Waco and would like to discuss this (or religion) over a beverage or two, please contact me. George's is open 6 days a week.

---

I don't get to Waco very often but I would be happy to buy you a beer at George's.

Will let you know next time I'm coming.

We can have a conversation about Mary, who had extraordinary faithfulness but who was an ordinary human being who went on to have a number of natural children conceived not by the holy spirit but with her human husband Joseph.

As to the point about Christendom, what you ignore is that before the Roman church enforced the secondary position of women, abundant evidence from the early church shows that women held positions of leadership and preaching. The Roman church tried to erase that history. Fact.

Another fact: Paul's own writings insisted that, within the Christian community, there was no distinction between male and female. It's in the Bible. More than once. I take Paul at his word.

You might also look up Saint Brigid of Kildare, a convert of St. Patrick who wielded the authority of a bishop under the Celtic model of Catholicism that was suppressed by the Roman church.

---

You would talk about that at George's? I bet you are a lot of fun at parties.

---

They were invited to George's to have that conversation.

---

Do they get the Table of Knowledge?

---

That's sounds like something from Monty Python so........I will say yes.

Carlos Cruz said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

And, yes, as I did say, they have to contort scripture to make the claim that Jesus instituted the priesthood. CokeBear's post actually makes that point for me.

If it makes you feel any better, Catholics aren't the only ones who contort scripture to "prove" a point of doctrine. Fundamentalists do it all the time.

---

Please describe how my post is contorting scripture. This is what the entirety of Christendom believed from more than 1500+ years.

I've stated my facts, please explain how they are incorrect. It would also help to know what type of Christianity to you subscribe to.

I'll extend the same olive branch to you that I have to others ...

If you're ever in Waco and would like to discuss this (or religion) over a beverage or two, please contact me. George's is open 6 days a week.

---

I don't get to Waco very often but I would be happy to buy you a beer at George's.

Will let you know next time I'm coming.

We can have a conversation about Mary, who had extraordinary faithfulness but who was an ordinary human being who went on to have a number of natural children conceived not by the holy spirit but with her human husband Joseph.

As to the point about Christendom, what you ignore is that before the Roman church enforced the secondary position of women, abundant evidence from the early church shows that women held positions of leadership and preaching. The Roman church tried to erase that history. Fact.

Another fact: Paul's own writings insisted that, within the Christian community, there was no distinction between male and female. It's in the Bible. More than once. I take Paul at his word.

You might also look up Saint Brigid of Kildare, a convert of St. Patrick who wielded the authority of a bishop under the Celtic model of Catholicism that was suppressed by the Roman church.

---

You would talk about that at George's? I bet you are a lot of fun at parties.

---

Did you go to Baylor?

quash said:

---

JXL said:

---

C. Jordan said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Interesting article, probably an interesting book. Many denominations teach women should submit to the authority of men. If you don't know about that you haven't been paying attention.

The idea of a woman in the Bible is interesting, women having contributed either next to nothing, or nothing, to the text. Entirely from a man's point of view. It's not surprising that women are often taught that they have less of a role in the church than men. Certainly it was like that in both old and new testaments.

It is a rather newfangled thing that society is striving for actual equality. It has happened before in a few places, but never on this scale. Given the role of women in the Bible, and most religions, not surprising.

---

Our NT seminar voted that Priscilla wrote Hebrews!

---

Did your NT seminar understand the importance of the fact that according to all four Gospels, it was women who first discovered the Resurrection?

---

Yes. And they pointed out that women were not allowed to be witnesses to certain events, a prejudice that exists to this day in Orthodox and some Conservative Jewish congregations.

---

Correct, that's exactly why a first-century Jewish writing - or a misogynist one - would never have recounted women as having been the first to discover the Resurrection.

J.B.Katz said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Christianity was radical at the time it began because women did take leadership roles. Subsequent teachings, especially after the Catholic church became the established power in Christendom, and possibly the selection of books to include in the biblical canon diminished that role, but it's clear from the book of Acts and some epistles.

---

The Catholic Church wasn't the established power, it WAS Christendom until the Great Schism in 1054 and later the rebellion of Luther in 1517.

Yes, the Catholic church did establish the canon as we know it today.

Please let me know which books that they excluded from the canon which diminished the roles of women.

Please let me know why Christ did not establish women as priests.

---

Jesus did not choose priests -- period, end of story, close the book.

The claim that Jesus established the Christian priesthood is a convenient and utterly false invention by Catholics, with no scriptural grounding (though they will contort the scriptures in trying to make this claim).

If you want to get technical, and we should, Jesus never established a religion beyond Judaism. He never told Jews to stop being Jews. And for about the first 4 decades after Jesus' death and resurrection, his followers were thought of as just another of the many voices within Judaism.

---

I'm not sure what first-century people thought of the Christians as being Jews - the Christians didn't (as recounted in Acts 15), the Jews didn't, and the Romans didn't (as shown by Nero).

J.B.Katz said:

---

We can have a conversation about Mary, who had extraordinary faithfulness but who was an ordinary human being who went on to have a number of natural children conceived not by the holy spirit but with her human husband Joseph.

As to the point about Christendom, what you ignore is that before the Roman church enforced the secondary position of women, abundant evidence from the early church shows that women held positions of leadership and preaching. The Roman church tried to erase that history. Fact.

Another fact: Paul's own writings insisted that, within the Christian community, there was no distinction between male and female. It's in the Bible. More than once. I take Paul at his word.

You might also look up Saint Brigid of Kildare, a convert of St. Patrick who wielded the authority of a bishop under the Celtic model of Catholicism that was suppressed by the Roman church.

---

Using the Bible alone, one can clear see that the "brother" of Jesus were not uterine brothers. I'll have to respond later this weekend when I have more time to type a full response with the other comments of your post.

With respect to Saint Brigid of Kildare, I'm somewhat familiar with her story, but it's been a "hot minute" since I've reviewed it. I love Hagiography. I'll have to review her story again.

Please provide some of the abundant evidence so that I can research the sources this weekend while I put together my post.

Thanks!

Carlos Cruz said:

---

quash said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

quash said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

quash said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

"For too many years, she said, she had stayed silent about the fact that women were taught that they mattered less to God than men did"

She is either making this up in her head or she spent years going to a church that does not teach the Bible or Christianity.

---

Sounds like she attended with Carlos Cruz.

---

Probably not. Women in my life know they are cherished. They don't have to be functionally similar in every endeavor to be special.

---

"There are reasons women should not teach men in church or have authority over them."

Telling them to shut up in church while doing all this cherishing is rank condescension. It is exactly like protecting women from the male gaze by covering them in a hijab. "For their own good."

---

You kicked the mess out of your strawman. Congrats.

---

I quoted you. Are you a strawman?

---

You quoted me. Then you mischaracterized the quote. And then you kicked the mess out the strawman you made when you mischaracterized the quote. Intellectual honesty not your thing?

---

Try some intellectual honesty yourself and distinguish your quote from my characterization. You cannot cherish something with one breath and deny it the right to speak in church with the next. Well, maybe YOU can but you dodged instead of doing so.

quash said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

quash said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

quash said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

quash said:

---

Redbrickbear said:

---

"For too many years, she said, she had stayed silent about the fact that women were taught that they mattered less to God than men did"

She is either making this up in her head or she spent years going to a church that does not teach the Bible or Christianity.

---

Sounds like she attended with Carlos Cruz.

---

Probably not. Women in my life know they are cherished. They don't have to be functionally similar in every endeavor to be special.

---

"There are reasons women should not teach men in church or have authority over them."

Telling them to shut up in church while doing all this cherishing is rank condescension. It is exactly like protecting women from the male gaze by covering them in a hijab. "For their own good."

---

You kicked the mess out of your strawman. Congrats.

---

I quoted you. Are you a strawman?

---

You quoted me. Then you mischaracterized the quote. And then you kicked the mess out the strawman you made when you mischaracterized the quote. Intellectual honesty not your thing?

---

Try some intellectual honesty yourself and distinguish your quote from my characterization. You cannot cherish something with one breath and deny it the right to speak in church with the next. Well, maybe YOU can but you dodged instead of doing so.

---

It is very simple. A woman can speak in church. Women do so all the time. Even some of the most conservative denominations allow women to speak and to speak in mixed company at church gatherings.

Women are simply not allowed to have authority over men in church. And they are not allowed to teach men. Outside of that, let women talk away. Let them speak to mixed groups, but women are not to be teachers of men on religious matters.

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

---

So that means every seminary, university, religious based high school, youth group, and church Sunday School that has women teachers who are teaching any male 13 and older (age at which a Jewish male becomes a man) on any religious matter is wrong. That's a lot.

Does your church have any women teaching or in a position of leadership over males 13 and older?

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

I don't think anyone, man or woman, could teach Carlos anything.

He already knows everything. Just ask him.

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

---

So that means every seminary, university, religious based high school, youth group, and church Sunday School that has women teachers who are teaching any male 13 and older (age at which a Jewish male becomes a man) on any religious matter is wrong. That's a lot.

Does your church have any women teaching or in a position of leadership over males 13 and older?

---

That is a lot. And no, women do not teach men or exercise authority over men in the church I attend. It is inappropriate.

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

We can have a conversation about Mary, who had extraordinary faithfulness but who was an ordinary human being who went on to have a number of natural children conceived not by the holy spirit but with her human husband Joseph.

As to the point about Christendom, what you ignore is that before the Roman church enforced the secondary position of women, abundant evidence from the early church shows that women held positions of leadership and preaching. The Roman church tried to erase that history. Fact.

Another fact: Paul's own writings insisted that, within the Christian community, there was no distinction between male and female. It's in the Bible. More than once. I take Paul at his word.

You might also look up Saint Brigid of Kildare, a convert of St. Patrick who wielded the authority of a bishop under the Celtic model of Catholicism that was suppressed by the Roman church.

---

Using the Bible alone, one can clear see that the "brother" of Jesus were not uterine brothers. I'll have to respond later this weekend when I have more time to type a full response with the other comments of your post.

With respect to Saint Brigid of Kildare, I'm somewhat familiar with her story, but it's been a "hot minute" since I've reviewed it. I love Hagiography. I'll have to review her story again.

Please provide some of the abundant evidence so that I can research the sources this weekend while I put together my post.

Thanks!

---

Actually the Greek word used for "brothers" in the NT means "from the same uterus."

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

---

Paul wasn't teaching Judaism.

He let women teach about Christianity.

He even let them teach preachers about Christianity. You know, the guys who should be the most humble and think they have the most to learn because they understand better than the rest of us how much they don't know about our almighty God.

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

---

So that means every seminary, university, religious based high school, youth group, and church Sunday School that has women teachers who are teaching any male 13 and older (age at which a Jewish male becomes a man) on any religious matter is wrong. That's a lot.

Does your church have any women teaching or in a position of leadership over males 13 and older?

---

That is a lot. And no, women do not teach men or exercise authority over men in the church I attend. It is inappropriate.

---

So in your opinion all of those hundreds of thousands of institutions are wrong. And you don't think that might make a woman in one of those million+ positions feel as though they matter less than men?

There is no woman Christian education or formation director, Sunday School teacher, or Youth Group Leader in your church? Care to provide a link to your church's website?

J.B.Katz said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

---

Paul wasn't teaching Judaism.

---

Oh, yes, he was. There is no Christianity without Judaism. And Paul taught from the Old Testament, what are commonly called Hebrew Scriptures. Paul was a Pharisee and said as much to show his expertise and devotion to the law that is lost on today's church.

J.B.Katz said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

---

Paul wasn't teaching Judaism.

He let women teach about Christianity.

He even let them teach preachers about Christianity. You know, the guys who should be the most humble and think they have the most to learn because they understand better than the rest of us how much they don't know about our almighty God.

---

Do you believe Jesus is the Son of God, died for your sins, was raised on the third day, and is the only way to heaven?

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

---

So that means every seminary, university, religious based high school, youth group, and church Sunday School that has women teachers who are teaching any male 13 and older (age at which a Jewish male becomes a man) on any religious matter is wrong. That's a lot.

Does your church have any women teaching or in a position of leadership over males 13 and older?

---

That is a lot. And no, women do not teach men or exercise authority over men in the church I attend. It is inappropriate.

---

So in your opinion all of those hundreds of thousands of institutions are wrong. And you don't think that might make a woman in one of those million+ positions feel as though they matter less than men?

There is no woman Christian education or formation director, Sunday School teacher, or Youth Group Leader in your church? Care to provide a link to your church's website?

---

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. Youth Group Leader? You must be talking about the children's parents.

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

---

So that means every seminary, university, religious based high school, youth group, and church Sunday School that has women teachers who are teaching any male 13 and older (age at which a Jewish male becomes a man) on any religious matter is wrong. That's a lot.

Does your church have any women teaching or in a position of leadership over males 13 and older?

---

That is a lot. And no, women do not teach men or exercise authority over men in the church I attend. It is inappropriate.

---

So in your opinion all of those hundreds of thousands of institutions are wrong. And you don't think that might make a woman in one of those million+ positions feel as though they matter less than men?

There is no woman Christian education or formation director, Sunday School teacher, or Youth Group Leader in your church? Care to provide a link to your church's website?

---

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. Youth Group Leader? You must be talking about the children's parents.

---

Man as defined by Jewish tradition (you know, Paul's viewpoint) = 13 years and older. Church website link?

You don't think some of those million+ women might be made to feel less than men by your viewpoint?

quash said:

---

JXL said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Coke Bear said:

---

J.B.Katz said:

---

Christianity was radical at the time it began because women did take leadership roles. Subsequent teachings, especially after the Catholic church became the established power in Christendom, and possibly the selection of books to include in the biblical canon diminished that role, but it's clear from the book of Acts and some epistles.

---

The Catholic Church wasn't the established power, it WAS Christendom until the Great Schism in 1054 and later the rebellion of Luther in 1517.

Yes, the Catholic church did establish the canon as we know it today.

Please let me know which books that they excluded from the canon which diminished the roles of women.

Please let me know why Christ did not establish women as priests.

---

Jesus did not choose priests -- period, end of story, close the book.

The claim that Jesus established the Christian priesthood is a convenient and utterly false invention by Catholics, with no scriptural grounding (though they will contort the scriptures in trying to make this claim).

If you want to get technical, and we should, Jesus never established a religion beyond Judaism. He never told Jews to stop being Jews. And for about the first 4 decades after Jesus' death and resurrection, his followers were thought of as just another of the many voices within Judaism.

---

I'm not sure what first-century people thought of the Christians as being Jews - the Christians didn't (as recounted in Acts 15), the Jews didn't, and the Romans didn't (as shown by Nero).

---

The Jews did as shown by Luke 4:15

The Romans did as shown by John 18:35

---

That's really interesting that those passages show the Christians were regarded as Jews, particularly since both of them refer to a time when the Christian church did not yet exist (thus, there were no "Christians").

You might refer to Acts 15:5ff for a discussion for a time when the Christian church did exist, and see how they distinguished themselves from the Jews.

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

90sBear said:

---

Carlos Cruz said:

---

I didn't say it didn't happen. I said it is not correct in the church. Paul wasn't writing about how to run the Academy.

---

So women can teach men (future priests and pastors) on religious matters in a seminary, but not at church? And you think Paul made this distinction when students of his day were only taught at the synagogue?

---

Paul didn't need to make that distinction. Women didn't teach men Judaism and they didn't receive a formal education on Judaism like Paul did. Paul was a scholar and lawyer. Name one 1st century female who was of either the school of Hillel or any other school of religious training.

Women should not teach men about religious matters. It isa failure of men that they do so today.

---

So that means every seminary, university, religious based high school, youth group, and church Sunday School that has women teachers who are teaching any male 13 and older (age at which a Jewish male becomes a man) on any religious matter is wrong. That's a lot.

Does your church have any women teaching or in a position of leadership over males 13 and older?

---

That is a lot. And no, women do not teach men or exercise authority over men in the church I attend. It is inappropriate.

---

So in your opinion all of those hundreds of thousands of institutions are wrong. And you don't think that might make a woman in one of those million+ positions feel as though they matter less than men?

There is no woman Christian education or formation director, Sunday School teacher, or Youth Group Leader in your church? Care to provide a link to your church's website?

---

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about. Youth Group Leader? You must be talking about the children's parents.

---

Man as defined by Jewish tradition (you know, Paul's viewpoint) = 13 years and older. Church website link?

You don't think some of those million+ women might be made to feel less than men by your viewpoint?

---

There is no youth group leader. Why wouldn't "youth" be with the adults?