xjwsforChrist

SABASTIOUS SAID

Jehovah's Witnesses use Genesis 3 as an excuse to abuse women. "Your desire will be for your husband and he will dominate you." Many men in the JW organization revel in this Scripture because it bestows them with absolute power. However, they ignore a simple truth: that this condition was NOT present within the female until AFTER she ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Bad. This means that BEFORE such occurred she was NOT desiring her husband and was NOT being dominated by him. So that would mean that in the JW New Order women would no longer be subject to men. They would be free because the curse will have been lifted.

Why did Paul say women cannot be leaders over men? Because for the most part they couldn't and this was demonstrated and agreed upon within that society. Only a small portion of women with the Genesis curse have the mental constitution to surmount the obstacles to leadership that men simply do not have. For example, women died more often then men because of childbirth. Leaders are supposed to endure. Woman's emotions have a tendency to go haywire 7 days out of the month. Nonetheless, these do not hinder ALL women from assuming positions of power and in fact because they have such obstacles when they DO become leaders, they are actually BETTER than men. However on a broad scale men, as a gender, are better fit for the job of leadership. Which is why America has never elected a woman president. How would their foreign policy change as they went through menopause? It just seems that biology is stacked against female leadership, which is why there are so many feminists. They know that SOME women can trudge past their own biological obstacles and obtain grand success, but they should admit that not every woman desires or even is capable of such a position of decision making simply because it's too difficult a feat with what female biology has to offer.

However, we live in a time where the equality of women in regards to men is vehemently pursued and obtained. This is a sign that our existence is moving closer to the depiction of the Garden of Eden in Genesis. The more women who act independently of men, the more women leaders that emerge the more our culture mimics true humanity, the way it was supposed to be.

Women are supposed to be a compliment to man and vice versa. This means CONFLICT, but the type that provides momentum for progress. We are supposed to work in unison, not work as a hierarchy, such is only a temporary curse that must be endured to the end.

The Bible shows us that humanity is in the midst of a cycle that ends with equality for women. The thing is that anyone can start acting correctly at any moment. They can choose to hang on the ancient words of Paul, or they can look to mimic perfection which involves harmony, not domination.

-Sab

PSACRAMENTO SAID

Many people use what Paul wrote ONCE in his pastoral letter to Timothy ( a letter who's full legitimacy is contested).
The seem to ignore all the other references by Paul to women being equal ( in spirit) to men and his exaltation of a few in his letter to the Romans.
Selective interpretation and proof texting which is something that JW's are notorious for.
The notion that women are not equal was prevalent in society for AGES and, with all honesty, STILL is.
Lets not kid ourselves.

AGUEST SAID

GREAT comments, both, dear Sab and P (the greatest of love and peace to you both!). What many forget is that, while woman (Eve) came out of man (Adham)... she was IN him and thus PART of him to start with. Which is why a man should "be loving his wife AS HIS OWN BODY." Because, once he joins to her he is re-stating that original union... where they were ONE. Same with Christ and HIS Bride/Body... and Christ with the Father (from Whom he came FORTH).

A woman's craving for her husband doesn't mean a subjection to him; the beasts were in subjection to Adham, yet their craving wasn't for HIM. Paul's position was based on the LAW that existed at the time, established by Jewish men and upheld by the Romans (who were trying to foment peace between the Jews). He knew that the early Body was in grave danger of being delivered up so he was trying to keep them SAFE. And so he didn't allow for any breaking of the (civil) law... which were the resulted of Jewish law that went "beyond the things written".

Indeed, if women were considered inferior, women like Deborah would have had judging rights instilled upon them. Barak would have been written to have skilled Sisera, not Jael. No WAY would an account about a non-Israel woman... who was also a prostitute have made it into the writings, a woman who showed herself to have more courage than the men of Israel!

It wasn't until the exile into and years among the Chaldeans that Israel began to relegate women to such a lesser position. Prior to, woman had much more say and were given much more regard. True, Sarah called Abraham "Lord"... but she also spoke her mind with him. As did Michal with David (to her detriment, yes, but that was because he was the king!).

Women were not only prophetesses but ministerial servants (women HAD to be the latter - a ministerial servant wasn't one who counted and handed out magazines, back then; it was one who MINISTERED to others. Cared for them physically. As the angels who came to my Lord after the Adversary's attempt at tempting him did - brought him food and water, etc.

There was no way a man would go and minister to, say, a single woman/widow. NO WAY. What if she needed help with bathing/hygiene? Turned in the bed? Had "female" issues to deal with?

The WTBTS has taken "ministerial servant" and changed it to mean something entirely different from what it meant to the early Body (but they're not alone - others have changed the meaning and purpose of things likes "elders/older men," "deacons", "presbyters", "church", etc., so...).

Anyway, great topic and glad it was brought up!

Again, peace to you, both!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

LARSINGER 58 SAID

Interesting topic.

I have a lot of speculative observations I would share, but I won't just yet.

I will note that, apparently, humans will be androgynous, like the angels, in their final form. With everyone living forever, zero population growth will have been reached and there will be no need for new children and thus no need for marriage. So the two sexes are a temporary thing, where the women, yes, became the weaker vessel, but needed and of great value for reproduction. After that phase of humanity is over though, there is no need for the two sexes or for women to be inferior, so everyone will be of the same sex. That way, finally, total equality for all will have been achieved.

We can all have sex with one another!

Now that relates to living forever. Some think it might be boring. But just say there are 400 billion people. You'd have the mental capacity to get to know each one. Plus, intimately since there is just one sex. So what if a computer program matched you with every human alive for a year in a different place in the earth? You'd get to know them intimately and even have sex with them. Then you'd take a year off to do your own thing for a few months and set up for the next match. Thus you're looking at a two-year process. That process would take 800 billion years! That's how long it would take for you to get to know every other person on the planet.

800 billion years!

Anyway, God's sentiment is that women should be equals and that is what will be the final state of humankind, who will be like the angels, all being of the same sex or being androgynous. No marriages, but you can have sex with anyone you want. A forever love feast!

The main point is that God wants women to be equal and to end their oppression. In the meantime, how grateful we are for them being our mothers, are we not?
_________________
The Bible is true and God is alive!

GLADIATOR SAID

Larsinger58


I'm starting to like your religion. My last religion as a JW was rather more restricted. Will everyone have sticky out bits or will we all have to manage without?

TEC SAID

Great topic Sab.

Genesis 3 is prophetic, rather than permissive.

God was not giving man permission to dominate women, as if it were man's right. He saw that man WOULD dominate women.

A lot of 'christianity' has used that to 'lord' it over women.

Like you said, if some of those men stopped to realize that it was not how God had created them, then they might reconsider their position. Paul also said that male and female, slave and free, etc... all were equal to God. Anything else is based upon our own prejudices and biases.

Peace to you,
tammy

TEC SAID

Something that is also interesting to ponder...

800 billion years is no closer to the end of eternity, than is a single day.

Peace,
tammy

YPPUPLLEH SAID






I don't want to give up my ability to pee while standing or walking!!!
_________________

LARSINGER58 SAID

ROFL! Maybe you won't have to.

Plus don't forget the drugs! God created coca, marijuana and poppies for a reason, you know!!