Women in Politics

[Cutter]

See guys, we are moving away from vanilla all of the time and even finding a way to share and agree with different views respectfully. That's what I'm talking about! :thumbs:
Personal note to go2church-I am never embarrassed to be, on what I believe to be, the Lord's side of an issue. :saint:

 

[go2church]

That's the case with folks who should be embarrassed, they usually don't know they should be and are more then willing to declare their ignorance for all to hear.

 

[Revmitchell]

What I see here in this thread alone is the hypocrisy of liberals who run around this board crying about what they perceive as tactics to shut them down who are doing that very thing in this thread. The fact is liberals do not see specific roles between men and women as legitimate and call such views as sexist and embarrassing. That is fine but stop pretending you are victims of anti-intellectualism when engage others in the same manner. Maybe a little upfront honesty will serve you better.

 

[abcgrad94]

I have yet to see any posts on this thread that contain scripture to prove women should not be political leaders.

I guess some of y'all don't count Queen Esther in the Bible as a political leader? God used her to save his people.:sleep:

 

[preachinjesus]

Sorry to burst your bubble my friend, but I do believe in everything I say on here.

Which worries me greatly...but I still don't believe it.

The quote that I listed above from you is another one of the socially acceptable tenets of the new world order.

Could you show me in our handbook where I quoted it from. We New World Order people publish a manual on how we are, explicitly, trying to take the world over through women and illegal immigrants...so that should be easy.

Also, as a point of clarification I'm still awaiting a Scriptural foundation for your assertions as applies to our society at large.

Diversity does not strengthen us as you have been brainwashed to believe.

Diversity absolutely makes us stronger. To suggest otherwise is wrong.

Do you think we should return to a White AngloSaxon Protestant male dominated society?

 

[jaigner]

Are you kidding me? Diversity doesn't make us stronger? Interacting with other perspectives helps us engage with our own. It makes us sharper and more vital as a society. It makes us realize that we don't live in a vacuum or bubble. It makes us more in tune to the needs of other people. It causes us to look outside of ourselves and keep from falling in love with the sound of our own voice, which happens oh so easily when we only appreciate our own perspective.

Shunning diversity is the height of intellectual arrogance.

It's happened to several people in this forum, as a matter of fact.

 

[annsni]

I have yet to see any posts on this thread that contain scripture to prove women should not be political leaders.

I was just about to post this myself. No Scripture, no argument. Clear and simple.

That straight enough for you Cutter?

 

[Dragoon68]

As Christians we say we follow Jesus and his teachings. Show me where Jesus said women should not serve in government. Thanks in advance.

Start with the creation story and read on from there. There's no specific admonition against women severing in civil government and neither a mandate to do so - that's not the point - but there is a clear pattern that demonstrates there are differences in the primary roles men and women were designed to carry out - and the pattern is one of male leadership in the family, the civil government, and the church. Jesus did not need to specifically address the subject in as much as it was evident in manners and customs of the times. The pattern was already established from the point of creation forward. Jesus, the second person of God, is the author of the entire Bible - not just what is quoted as words spoken in His human incarnation. The apostles clarified a great deal about the roles of men and women which are support the pattern previously defined. Nothing suggests that there have not been times and places when roles we're, out of necessity, exchanged but that, in itself, does not alter the fundamental design. Ability, likewise, does not imply a necessity to exercise it. That does not imply anything inferior about women - it only notes the purpose driven differences in design that our creator instilled in both His male and female creations. Collectively they exist to glorify Him and they do that best when they follow His design.

 

[Dragoon68]

This all sounds well and good, but at the end of the day this whole concept is a slam against women. Check out what the op says about women not being gifted for the kinds of decision making that is necessary in the political arena.

That is disgusting and sad; the worst kind of generalization. This does not at all seem to be God's design, as God gifts everyone in unique ways. I'm a man who is an elementary school music teacher. I may not be tough like John Wayne or something, but I can teach music to young children. That's not something you see a whole lot of men doing.

Let's be honest. Manhood and womanhood is important and distinct, but let's not read more into the issue than really is there. This sort of idea is completely extra-biblical and does not fit the trajectory of God's plan for gender. We have to remember there are few female leaders in the Bible because women were considered property - often something valuable only as a commodity. Thankfully, we have moved way beyond that now, but evidently, we still have a way to go. I pray in my lifetime this sexist tint over biblical interpretation will be eradicated in evangelicalism. It's time.

I think you may be generalizing the comments to mean something they do not. God's design, as spelled out from the beginning, clearly confirms differences in the primary roles of men and women as well as their relationship to each other. It is also clear that neither is superior to the other in their status as children of God - recognizing the differences does not violate this principle. The sexist movement is the one that desires to eradicate God's design and replace it with one that is more palatable to those who believe being male or female does not come with inherent requirements as created but merely choices for the individual to be whatever they want to be whether it be to abdicate one role or seize another.

 

[preachinjesus]

Ah yes the ole "I can read my view into Scripture" version of exegetical reply.

We are asking for explicit texts speaking about women's roles in social governance here. Not circular discussions alluding to Scripture, explicit Scriptural citations.

 

[Dragoon68]

Are you kidding me? Diversity doesn't make us stronger? Interacting with other perspectives helps us engage with our own. It makes us sharper and more vital as a society. It makes us realize that we don't live in a vacuum or bubble. It makes us more in tune to the needs of other people. It causes us to look outside of ourselves and keep from falling in love with the sound of our own voice, which happens oh so easily when we only appreciate our own perspective.

Shunning diversity is the height of intellectual arrogance.

It's happened to several people in this forum, as a matter of fact.

Diversity is being misused to destroy some differences while prompting others. Diversity is being misused to carry tolerance to the point of acceptance. Diversity is being misused to excuse all manner of thinking and acting by removing all boundaries on what is good and what is not.

Promoted diversity that alters your own culture may or may not be good depending upon which is right and which is wrong.

Making men and women "equal" in all things - not in the since of value but in the sense of purpose and function - is a highly destructive trend that destroys the institutions of the marriage, the family, the church, and the government. It's effects are evident in America's present decline.

 

[Dragoon68]

... I personally believe we are a better, stronger society when all are welcomed at the table of social discussion. We are stronger because we allow women to speak and work hard to accomplish things for good in our society. Your desire is to remove ourselves backwards to the gender specific, myopic (imho) leadership of a patriarchal autocracy. That is not what we need in our world.

But ... we are not "better" or "stronger" since men and women have altered their roles in our society. We are, in fact, worse and are raising yet another generation even more confused and corrupted.

 

[Dragoon68]

Ah yes the ole "I can read my view into Scripture" version of exegetical reply.

We are asking for explicit texts speaking about women's roles in social governance here. Not circular discussions alluding to Scripture, explicit Scriptural citations.

Yes, you can read your view into scripture.

Can you provide explicit texts illustrating the roles for women you advocate?

Can you formulate a general position based on the whole of scripture that advocates such a role?

 

[preachinjesus]

Burden of proof is one the OP and its advocates. That is the challenge. You can take it up or ignore it...but the burden is on you to support your position.

 

[Cutter]

I guess some of y'all don't count Queen Esther in the Bible as a political leader? God used her to save his people.:sleep:

Nice try ABCGrad and Ann, but to suggest that Esther was a political leader is foolish. Who was she a leader of? Certainly not the King, his subjects, or the people in general. She just happened to be in the right place at the right time. She listened to her uncle and was instrumental in swaying the King in the decision concerning the Jewish people.
A political leader...HA! :laugh:

 

[Dragoon68]

A primary role of woman is to be a helper for man.Genesis 2:18:"Then the LORD God said, 'It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him.' "

Did God really mean this? Yes, He did!

It's rather difficult for a woman to be King and to be a helper to her man at the same time isn't it?

No, this scripture doesn't say "Woman, thou shalt not serve in civil government!" but it does establish an order of relationship between man and woman that is adversely altered when women seek other goals instead of the primary one.

 

[Dragoon68]

Burden of proof is one the OP and its advocates. That is the challenge. You can take it up or ignore it...but the burden is on you to support your position.

Says you! I say you can also prove your point or disprove mine. I'll certainly make my case!

 

[Cutter]

Burden of proof is one the OP and its advocates. That is the challenge. You can take it up or ignore it...but the burden is on you to support your position.

I believe the points made by Dragoon68 in the following link present all of the evidence needed.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1546993&postcount=48

 

[Dragoon68]

It looks like this Adam and Eve thing carried over into the New Testament era:

1 Timothy 2:9 "Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness. A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint. "

Did God really mean what He said? Yes, He did!

I know that many will take this to apply only to the roles in the church. Yet, it addresses a lot more than that even bringing in the matter of children.

 

[FR7 Baptist]

[/SIZE]No, this scripture doesn't say "Woman, thou shalt not serve in civil government!" but it does establish an order of relationship between man and woman that is adversely altered when women seek other goals instead of the primary one.

See, I told you it was not in the Bible. In regards to the headship thing, even if you accept that women in politics upsets God's design for marriage, which I don't, that still doesn't stop single women in government.