Southern Baptists Eject Churches for Having Female Pastors
-
I don’t like how Christians now get criticized for following the tenets of their religion (even though they may differ from sect to sect).
It’s tough to be an openly Christian person in the prevailing culture. (At least the circles I run in)
@xenon said in Southern Baptists Eject Churches for Having Female Pastors:
I don’t like how Christians now get criticized for following the tenets of their religion (even though they may differ from sect to sect).
It's not a Christian-specific phenomenon. Muslims and Jews get the same treatment too when they follow tenets that are further away from the prevailing societal norm at particular time and space.
Heck, it's not even specific to followers of religions. Confucian scholars were criticized for following old teachings too strictly or not knowing how to adapt to new societal norms.
-
When I ultimately take a new position, I don't want to hear about or discuss political or religious views in, or outside the office TBH.
@mark said in Southern Baptists Eject Churches for Having Female Pastors:
When I ultimately take a new position, I don't want to hear about or discuss political or religious views in, or outside the office TBH.
That's what I said! Then I got a job as the church caretaker.
It didn't end well.
-
There's two alternatives:
- God, a being of infinite power and majesty really cares about the gender of the person leading people in their adulation of him.
- Paul was a product of his time and thought of women as being somewhat inferior.
Which seems more likely?
Yes, I know, the book says the former. But who compiled the book?
The truth is out there somewhere.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Southern Baptists Eject Churches for Having Female Pastors:
There's two alternatives:
- God, a being of infinite power and majesty really cares about the gender of the person leading people in their adulation of him.
- Paul was a product of his time and thought of women as being somewhat inferior.
Which seems more likely?
Yes, I know, the book says the former. But who compiled the book?
The truth is out there somewhere.
I'll take what's behind Door #1, please.
God, being of infinite power and majesty, created male and female, He gave each unique talents and responsibilities. He also gave them shared responsibilities.
The book is The Book
. I'm not Presbyterian or some other Christian denomination that has fallen into apostasy. I believe the Bible is inerrant and the inspired Word of GodBaptists have a strong history of the Priesthood of the Believer. There is no intercessory between man and God. There is only the Holy Word and trying to study and walk in the light it gives us.
If it makes one uncomfortable or convicted, so be it. It's always about trying to improve while on the journey.
Most people would be better to quit expending so much effort on chasing or trying to justify loopholes, and just live the Word.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in Southern Baptists Eject Churches for Having Female Pastors:
There's two alternatives:
- God, a being of infinite power and majesty really cares about the gender of the person leading people in their adulation of him.
- Paul was a product of his time and thought of women as being somewhat inferior.
Which seems more likely?
Yes, I know, the book says the former. But who compiled the book?
The truth is out there somewhere.
I'll take what's behind Door #1, please.
God, being of infinite power and majesty, created male and female, He gave each unique talents and responsibilities. He also gave them shared responsibilities.
The book is The Book
. I'm not Presbyterian or some other Christian denomination that has fallen into apostasy. I believe the Bible is inerrant and the inspired Word of GodBaptists have a strong history of the Priesthood of the Believer. There is no intercessory between man and God. There is only the Holy Word and trying to study and walk in the light it gives us.
If it makes one uncomfortable or convicted, so be it. It's always about trying to improve while on the journey.
Most people would be better to quit expending so much effort on chasing or trying to justify loopholes, and just live the Word.
@Jolly said in Southern Baptists Eject Churches for Having Female Pastors:
Baptists have a strong history of the Priesthood of the Believer. There is no intercessory between man and God. There is only the Holy Word and trying to study and walk in the light it gives us.
If it makes one uncomfortable or convicted, so be it. It's always about trying to improve while on the journey.
Most people would be better to quit expending so much effort on chasing or trying to justify loopholes, and just live the Word.
I'm sure there are others who are much better qualified to talk about the history of Christianity than me, but my understanding is that the belief in the literal truth of The Book as interpreted now isn't something that goes back to the beginning of the church, but was something that developed over time.
So, in some ways that's a modern interpretation too.
The Roman Catholics think they're the one true church, too, going back to the first leader of the church.
There's an old joke that ends with the punchline 'Die, heretic scum!', which I'm too lazy to type out, but I think we've all heard.
-
There's two alternatives:
- God, a being of infinite power and majesty really cares about the gender of the person leading people in their adulation of him.
- Paul was a product of his time and thought of women as being somewhat inferior.
Which seems more likely?
Yes, I know, the book says the former. But who compiled the book?
The truth is out there somewhere.
@Doctor-Phibes said in Southern Baptists Eject Churches for Having Female Pastors:
There's two alternatives:
- God, a being of infinite power and majesty really cares about the gender of the person leading people in their adulation of him.
- Paul was a product of his time and thought of women as being somewhat inferior.
Which seems more likely?
Yes, I know, the book says the former. But who compiled the book?
The truth is out there somewhere.
I would vote for #2. Again, it seems like if something literal in the Bible fits what a person want to prove, then the Bible should be taken literally. However, if the literal words in the Bible dont make sense or are really outrageous, then the person can say that the Bible is giving an analogy and should not be taken literally.
-
-
Ever read TG’s first post in this thread?
I think you’ll find your answer there.FWIW, I believe Thomas Jefferson’s abridgement of the New Testament is more than sufficient in presenting a person with the moral lesson’s of the Bible. It is also devoid of the supernatural events attributed to God and the man, Jesus Christ.
The notion of the Word as you call it, is in my view, a construct of early Church scholars determined to stamp out heterodoxy among believers.
-
Funny, you don't look like a cute Asian-descent female, but self-appointed identities are so hard to fathom nowadays.
No, the Bible taken as a whole is an intertwined message of God to the Jews and later to the Jews and Gentiles. It was written over a period of 1500 years by many people. Men have a very hard time predicting the future, but almost 25% of the Bible is prophetic, yet those prophecies have not been proven false (some have yet to pass, true, but stay tuned
). Most other "holy" books don't contain prophecy or have been proven not 100% correct, which is a sign of false prophecy.The Bible has not been proven false by modern archeology. In every case, the buildings were there, the mountain was there, the civilization was there, the people were there. Hundreds of archeological sites have been discovered, simply by following clues within the Bible.
The Bible is unique. Most religions teach man will receive his after-life rewards through good works. The Bible says God sent his only Son down here to die for man's sins, and that whoever believes in Him shall have everlasting Life. We are saved by Grace, not by works.
I was going to suggest to TG she read the Gospel of John. Perhaps you might want to do so, also...
-
Funny, you don't look like a cute Asian-descent female, but self-appointed identities are so hard to fathom nowadays.
No, the Bible taken as a whole is an intertwined message of God to the Jews and later to the Jews and Gentiles. It was written over a period of 1500 years by many people. Men have a very hard time predicting the future, but almost 25% of the Bible is prophetic, yet those prophecies have not been proven false (some have yet to pass, true, but stay tuned
). Most other "holy" books don't contain prophecy or have been proven not 100% correct, which is a sign of false prophecy.The Bible has not been proven false by modern archeology. In every case, the buildings were there, the mountain was there, the civilization was there, the people were there. Hundreds of archeological sites have been discovered, simply by following clues within the Bible.
The Bible is unique. Most religions teach man will receive his after-life rewards through good works. The Bible says God sent his only Son down here to die for man's sins, and that whoever believes in Him shall have everlasting Life. We are saved by Grace, not by works.
I was going to suggest to TG she read the Gospel of John. Perhaps you might want to do so, also...
Funny, you don't look like a cute Asian-descent female, but self-appointed identities are so hard to fathom nowadays.
No I don’t, but I do read what she and others write and retain some degree of recollection of what is being stated. I can’t help it if you do not or are just too lazy.
Have read the Gospel of John. There are some lessons there. Still don’t buy into the supernatural aspects that gloss its wisdom.
You however are free to go ahead and believe what you want. It’s obviously essential that you do for your own sake.
-
Atheism? Sinners?
You’re certainly not shy of throwing out labels. But I understand it, you are a self admitted evangelizing Baptist. I don’t take your view to heart or seriously.
As for my personal beliefs, it does not preclude a Creator it is just not in the Christian sense. I have more in common with Jefferson, Beethoven and Napoleon in this regard than Hitchens and Dawkins.
It’s also really none of your business how I choose to regulate my spiritual beliefs.
-
@Renauda said in Southern Baptists Eject Churches for Having Female Pastors:
No, just content with my lot.
How about you, Grand Inquisitor?
No inquisitor. We've established you're halfway there, so I'm just trying to drag you across the Finish Line
-
I am not against religion - in fact, I believe that it offers a lot of benefits: a sense of belonging, generally a good moral code, purpose in life, etc.
But, I do have a couple of "problems"
For example, the Bible being taken litereral. It is a book written 2000 years ago and a lot of it is "as told to". I think that it is pretty much agreed that eyewitness accounts are often more inaccurate than accurate.
How can one religion claims to be the one and only true religion. Why is Muslim say that theirs is the only true religion? Same with Christian, Buddhist, etc.
Ultimately, religion (for my opinion) comes down to faith and not any real "facts". Because for every "fact" a Buddhist gives out that "proves" they are the correct religion, a Christian (or other religion) has their own "fact" to "prove" their case.
But, as I said, I do think that religion can provide a lot of benefits to people.
-
No inquisitor. We've established you're halfway there, so I'm just trying to drag you across the Finish Line
You’ve established nothing of the sort. Your faith is your own, I do not desire to be a part of it or participate in it.
@Renauda said in Southern Baptists Eject Churches for Having Female Pastors:
No inquisitor. We've established you're halfway there, so I'm just trying to drag you across the Finish Line
You’ve established nothing of the sort. Your faith is your own, I do not desire to be a part of it or participate in it.
Aw, c'mon man! Total immersion baptism. It'll be the best bath you've had in years! (It may be the only bath he's had in years.
).
