Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
August 21, 2006 2:58 PM   Subscribe

This post was deleted for the following reason: newsfilter, axegrindfiler. see also: sucks



 
Yeah but can't we just ditch the Bible already? It's always an amazing thing to watch Christians pick and choose which parts of the text they wish to embrace and which they wish to reject. The Bible speaks out against homosexuals, women, people of color, etc, etc etc.

Can't we just drop it already?
posted by xmutex at 3:03 PM on August 21, 2006


*ahem* These people have engaged in a common misinterpretation of the verse. If you actually read the Gospels, you will find that there were women that traveled with Jesus and learned from him (see Luke 8). Prior to this time, women were not allowed to read the scriptures. Thus, a more accurate translation of Paul's advice would be "Do not let those who are inexperienced in the Word of God teach...."

Note: I am one of those radicals that thinks that if you believe Jesus is God, then what he says must surely be more important than what Paul says. Take it as you will.
posted by ilsa at 3:09 PM on August 21, 2006


xmutex, I know one pro-gay-rights Lutheran pastor who laments that the fundies' whole problem with the picking and choosing is that they're not literal enough -- they fast-forward right past the parts where Christ speaks to God's love for the rejected, the outcasts, the unloveable. Some of us want to try to live up to this standard and others of us want to go on a Thou-Shalt-Not power trip. Weirdly, I've watched the same individuals do both at different times.

I think this is exactly what Jesus had in mind when He admonished His disciples about peace vs. swords.
posted by pax digita at 3:11 PM on August 21, 2006


ilsa writes "Thus, a more accurate translation of Paul's advice would be 'Do not let those who are inexperienced in the Word of God teach....'"

So Paul wrote "inexperienced" and King James's translators translated it to "woman"?
posted by orthogonality at 3:12 PM on August 21, 2006


Look, you gotta take the thing as a whole or ditch it. I mean, nobody just picks and chooses what they want to believe out of history books, do they?


lol
posted by cellphone at 3:12 PM on August 21, 2006


I was staying at a cheap hotel in Reno, and someone had left a pamphlet from their group calling for all gays to be executed. I was horrified. "Gideons", they called themselves.
posted by riotgrrl69 at 3:13 PM on August 21, 2006


lol indeed, cellphone. Caller, do you have a question?
posted by boo_radley at 3:13 PM on August 21, 2006


It's always an amazing thing to watch Christians pick and choose which parts of the text they wish to embrace and which they wish to reject.

Sounds like he finally realized how hypocritical it is to do that, and instead of choosing reality decide to give himself up to madness. I wonder what other gems he is going to enforce?
posted by Mr_Zero at 3:14 PM on August 21, 2006


also it's nice that CNN dubbed her the "Church Lady" rather than "teacher". Buncha pricks alla `round.
posted by boo_radley at 3:14 PM on August 21, 2006


ilsa....you and Thomas Jefferson and Friedrich ("Deus, qualem Paulus creavit, Dei negatio") Nietzsche, and at least one seminarian I used to know....
posted by pax digita at 3:14 PM on August 21, 2006


Also, how do the transgendered work in this scenario?
posted by boo_radley at 3:15 PM on August 21, 2006


Some folks say that can be translated that a wife cannot teach a husband. (The word for woman and wife are the same. )

You can't use the Bible to say women can never teach, as it also states that Pricilla and Aquila taught Apollos-and as Pricilla (or Prisca as she is sometimes referred to) was listed first, she is considered preeminent.

And the thing is, back in those days, the culture was totally against women even being TAUGHT, much less being able to teach. It was either the Greeks or the Romans that for awhile actually made it against the law to teach a woman. (I just read that last week in a reference book , don't remember which one.)

If one reads the New Testament with an understanding of the culture of the time, it is a pretty radically feminist book, believe it or not. Shocking, I know.
posted by konolia at 3:16 PM on August 21, 2006


Thus, a more accurate translation of Paul's advice would be "Do not let those who are inexperienced in the Word of God teach...."

Well said! This approach could really be used throughout the Bible.

Leviticus 20:13 as commonly mistranslated: "If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

Accurate translation: "Bunnies are fluffy and nice and it is nice to cuddle bunnies in a rainbow puffcloud cottoncandy parade!!!!KAWAII"
posted by riotgrrl69 at 3:17 PM on August 21, 2006


xmutex: the bible speaks out against people of color? Where? What evidence do you have that this congregation is picking and choosing?
posted by null terminated at 3:19 PM on August 21, 2006


Such an outrage! It's mind boggling in this day and age in the USA!

This male chauvinist pig, Tim LaBouf, had his wife, Kendra, write/sign the letter to the 81 year old teacher, Mary Lambert, who'd taught there for 54 years and been Sunday school teacher for 11 years. What a spineless, double standard practising jerk. I pity that guy's wife. LaBouf is obviously some kind of of psycho control freak misogynist. At least this abuse of power is getting news attention.

Power-and-control freaks misuse whatever is at hand to get their way.
posted by nickyskye at 3:20 PM on August 21, 2006




. . . But its Mrs Doubtfire. . . and she IS a man
posted by isopraxis at 3:24 PM on August 21, 2006


"Do not let those who are inexperienced in the Word of God teach...."

How do you square that interpretation with the verses that immediately follow, 12 and 13:

"For Adam was formed first, then Eve."
"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression."

?
posted by Bort at 3:30 PM on August 21, 2006


If you actually read the Gospels, you will find that there were women that traveled with Jesus and learned from him (see Luke 8).

Emphasis mine. How is this relevent to women teaching?
posted by riotgrrl69 at 3:34 PM on August 21, 2006


23skidoo, it is obvious to me that ilsa is trying to whitewash over unpleasant, but accurately translated, scripture. Her argument makes no sense. She is not attempting to gain meaning from the text, but rather to change the meaning of the text based on what she would like it to mean.
posted by riotgrrl69 at 3:37 PM on August 21, 2006


you will find that there were women that traveled with Jesus and learned from him (see Luke 8)

But this preacher didn't say women couldn't learn from Jesus, he said they couldn't teach in a church. So how does this passage refute that?
posted by thirteenkiller at 3:40 PM on August 21, 2006


It's always an amazing thing to watch Christians defend their relevance in the 21st century.
Please try and keep up folks, we have a long way to go.
posted by 2sheets at 3:40 PM on August 21, 2006


It's always a riot watching you western folks get all het up whenever some Redneckistani religious fundamentalist wackjob wants to use his holy book as the law of the land.
posted by Osama bin Laden at 3:45 PM on August 21, 2006


1 Timothy 2:12 Gear
posted by brain_drain at 3:46 PM on August 21, 2006


Of course, the Pastoral Epistles weren't written by Paul in the first place, which puts that whole "infallible bible" thing up in the air. Which is what happens when you try to live your life by sketchy translations of ancient works.
posted by graymouser at 3:47 PM on August 21, 2006


It's always an amazing thing to watch Christians defend their relevance in the 21st century

Talk about whitewashing!
posted by smackfu at 3:51 PM on August 21, 2006


I'll be sure and wipe my ass with that particular page today.
posted by telstar at 3:51 PM on August 21, 2006


As long as women are still allowed to teach Spin classes I know that the Almighty is just.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 3:52 PM on August 21, 2006


Look, you gotta take the thing as a whole or ditch it. I mean, nobody just picks and chooses what they want to believe out of history books, do they?

History Books Rules & Laws For Living Life

Bible = Rules & Laws For Living Life
posted by tkchrist at 3:53 PM on August 21, 2006


It's amusing to watch people umbrella wacko Christians and mainstream Christians as "Christianity" or "the Christians", and then watch those same folks' temporal veins bulge and mouthes froth if someone lumps wacko Muslim and mainstream Muslims together as "Islam" or "the Muslims".
posted by CodeBaloo at 3:54 PM on August 21, 2006 [1 favorite]


Look, you gotta take the thing as a whole or ditch it. I mean, nobody just picks and chooses what they want to believe out of history books, do they? lol

But people don't claim that history books are the word of God.
posted by riotgrrl69 at 3:54 PM on August 21, 2006


It's not that amusing, CodeBaloo.
posted by smackfu at 3:55 PM on August 21, 2006


Stupid Christians doing stupid things! Oh my!
posted by doctor_negative at 3:56 PM on August 21, 2006


How is this relevant to women teaching?

How indeed? I balked at converting to Orthodoxy when I discovered they have the same set of problems with anyone packing a uterus preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ and ministering to the needs of my soul as my own childhood Roman Catholicism did. If we are all sinful children of a broken and repaired (by extreme measures) covenant with God, than nobody -- straight or gay, man or woman, black, white or pastel paisley -- is any more or less capable of ministering to the faithful as anybody else.

I really miss my home church, where, as a practical matter, Sunday school would have come to a screeching, smoking, shuddering halt if we were silly enough to try to exclude women from teaching positions -- they were by far the bulk of the teaching laity, especially for the children. Our parish used to get its share of control freaks like the LaBoufs passing through from time to time, and they either came to understand that we're all in this together -- my favorite line from the movie Brazil -- or they became impatient with our predominant tolerance of difference and moved on to some congregation more to their liking.
posted by pax digita at 3:57 PM on August 21, 2006


It's amusing to watch people umbrella wacko Christians and mainstream Christians as "Christianity" or "the Christians", and then watch those same folks' temporal veins bulge and mouthes froth if someone lumps wacko Muslim and mainstream Muslims together as "Islam" or "the Muslims".

For the record, the qu'ran is kinda dumb too. I was reading the bit with Moses earlier. Lol-a-minute.
posted by riotgrrl69 at 3:59 PM on August 21, 2006


I call nutpicking
posted by scheptech at 4:02 PM on August 21, 2006


Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights, other founding documents = Rules & Laws for Living Life


Bible ≠ mishmash of varyingly hyper politicized gobbldeygook of varyingly dubious historicity, taken as literal and unvarnished truth by mouth breathers and knuckle draggers of Western Civ.
posted by stenseng at 4:05 PM on August 21, 2006


It's amusing to watch people umbrella wacko Christians and mainstream Christians as "Christianity" or "the Christians", and then watch those same folks' temporal veins bulge and mouthes froth if someone lumps wacko Muslim and mainstream Muslims together as "Islam" or "the Muslims".

Muslims and Christians of any degree all have one thing in common...belief in deadly fairy tales. I equate the two religions and throw in Judaism for good measure.
posted by telstar at 4:08 PM on August 21, 2006


It's not just that he's a preacher--he's in local government as well--what are his attitudes towards equal rights? towards our laws?
posted by amberglow at 4:09 PM on August 21, 2006


I can't believe this hasn't been shitcanned yet. Where are you, Matt?
posted by boo_radley at 4:11 PM on August 21, 2006


Lambert said she feels there's more to her dismissal than the scriptual qualifications. Last month, Lambert and two others were kicked off the Diaconate Board. They were told they were being removed for attendance issues.

Lambert said things started to slowly change at the church two years ago when LaBouf became the pastor.


Ahhhh, Worship Board politics, that familiar stench. At our church, it was the prim & proper blue-haired little old ladies who didn't want us to do a Fasching with beer because "it would attract the wrong element."
posted by pax digita at 4:12 PM on August 21, 2006


It's amusing to watch people umbrella wacko Christians and mainstream Christians as "Christianity" or "the Christians", and then watch those same folks' temporal veins bulge and mouthes froth if someone lumps wacko Muslim and mainstream Muslims together as "Islam" or "the Muslims".
posted by CodeBaloo


It's because they have an axe to grind. It's a one link cnn post so people can point and laugh. Add in the posters history, and you have to wonder how matt/jess allow it to stay.
posted by justgary at 4:13 PM on August 21, 2006


Damn those Chritianofascists!
posted by Artw at 4:13 PM on August 21, 2006


Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights, other founding documents Are not "history books."

IE : Interpretations of OTHER documents and third hand happenings re-recorded and distilled.

They ARE the documents themselves.

AND, as others pointed out, history books nor the constitution claim to be the word of god. Though it could be argued the BoR makes a case for rights coming from god.

Your analogy (and cellphones original argument about "history books" I was mocking) is rather poor.

But I will take your analogy of the Bible as spot on.
posted by tkchrist at 4:19 PM on August 21, 2006


Here is an idea: Let those folks who want to believe some such way to believe as such. Stay away from them if you don't like them. Vote against them when they come into your world etc etc. ad nauseum.
posted by BrodieShadeTree at 4:35 PM on August 21, 2006


Brodie: A nice idea in theory, but more than a few of them seem to want to impose their ideas on everyone.
posted by mrnutty at 4:37 PM on August 21, 2006


It's a one link cnn post so people can point and laugh.

Sure:
1 - pull up google news, enter "christian"
2 - scan for tasty morsel, make post
3 - frothing ensues

Nutpicking.
posted by scheptech at 4:39 PM on August 21, 2006


So, as said before. Vote against them etc. They are minority. Being scared or showing a knee-jerk reaction to the banning of a sunday school teacher as is the case in this thread, won't help. Part od f the big problem in society in America is the US vs. THEM mentality. Wonder what it looks like? Read the above thread.
posted by BrodieShadeTree at 4:40 PM on August 21, 2006


Here's an interpretation of these verses from another perspective (warning: hellishly bad web design).

And, for what it's worth, here's another exegesis which is far more detailed and technical than I can really follow, which upholds the idea that women should not be teachers in church (charitably, though, it does allow them to teach "other women and children").
posted by whir at 4:42 PM on August 21, 2006


Damn those Chritianofascists!

The word is christofascist.

Lets review:

christofascist
islamofascist
judeofascist
posted by telstar at 4:43 PM on August 21, 2006


Shut the fuck up, bitch! Timothy 2:13
posted by obeygiant at 4:43 PM on August 21, 2006




nice exegesis, obeygiant. using the old noggin there.
posted by BrodieShadeTree at 4:49 PM on August 21, 2006


ol @ teh christians omg so dumb am i rite
posted by Heywood Mogroot at 5:02 PM on August 21, 2006


This guy Le Bouf just kicked everybody's grandmother down the stairs.

So much for the budding political career of yet another photogenic right-wing evangelical preacher.

Mary Lambert, your 54 years of service are crowned with an even greater service to your church and to your country.
posted by jamjam at 5:09 PM on August 21, 2006


LeBouf, hmph - maybe he was radicalized by freedom fries.
posted by scheptech at 5:33 PM on August 21, 2006


Yeah but this is the ad that runs with the story:


posted by caddis at 5:35 PM on August 21, 2006


As for all you Christian haters - just like all Muslims are not terrorists, not all Christians are fundie wackos. My church has women priests and gay bishops, yay. Love thy neighbor trumps judge thy neighbor!
posted by caddis at 5:40 PM on August 21, 2006


I went to an extraordinarily conservative Christian school (lots of Bob Jones University graduates working there. Yippeee!) and we had Bible class every Tuesday and Thursday. Only the male teachers were allowed to teach the classes. I think the female teachers all took a 30 minute coffee break.
posted by chiababe at 5:42 PM on August 21, 2006


"so people can point and laugh"
And what the hell is wrong with that? Stupidity deserves to be mocked.
Oh please Matt, come and protect my fragile belief system from the intrusion of reality or I just might have to... oh I don't know, make a post on my blog wagging my finger at all the non-believers and feeling smug about the rapture coming to take me away to jesus land.
posted by 2sheets at 5:48 PM on August 21, 2006


Speaking (or not) of the Catholic church and its all male priesthood, I've always thought that if women would stop cleaning the churches, stop giving money every Sunday, stop holding bakesales to support the church and and all that aiding and abetting their own subjugation, the Catholic church (at least in America) might start to sing a new tune.

As for the debating the bible, I find it sad that some folks want to endlessly debate minutae while they totally miss the message of love.
posted by bim at 5:53 PM on August 21, 2006


This Tim Labouf ass has his own blog in which he speaks about himself in the third person and gets 0 comments on his audio sermons.
posted by nickyskye at 5:56 PM on August 21, 2006


First, this is flagged as 'noise.' BrodieShadeTree is right on the money. Citing one-sided and inflammatory verses from a diverse religious text to provoke outrage is bullshit, whether you're Jerry Falwell or orthogonality. I don't know how a reasonable discussion was supposed to follow from such a beginning.

Second, since secular americans tend to understand faraway cultures and religions better than the christians they live alongside (and that's saying very, very little), I should point out that this sort of thing is extremely rare; women teach sunday school all the time. And the christian community in the United States seems to me to be split about 50 - 50 on the issue of ordination of women; there are plenty of mainstream denominations that ordain women, especially among evangelicals. konolia pointed out the substantial biblical justification for this.

Third, I always wonder why people who are pissed off at the christians tend to quote the bible at them. In doing so, they ignore the fact that religion claims to be experiential; that is, that religion claims to be something that cannot be understood until one has experienced it. They probably scoff at the idea that anything must be experienced before it's understood, but given that so many things humans care about (love, knowledge, reason) are the same, I'm given to believe that, if one religion isn't true, at least something like religion is.
posted by koeselitz at 6:04 PM on August 21, 2006


This post is still standing, I'll guess, because this particular picked nut is also an elected official.

Let's see if the derail (if it is in fact one) can be ended by referring to that: He's said his no-chicks philosophy doesn't apply outside the church ... so are we done?
posted by scheptech at 6:10 PM on August 21, 2006


Wow, I just CAN'T WAIT until the Taliban version of VeggieTales! W00t!
posted by moonbird at 6:12 PM on August 21, 2006


23skidoo, I don't read Koine Greek, but I trust the myriad scholars throughout history who have made almost identical translations of the verse and the supporting verses from the original Greek, more than I trust your or ilya's strange argument. It IS possible for the words that people write down to have meaning, and it is NOT always possible to assign whatever irrelevent or contradictory revisionist meaning you like to those words, no matter how much you would like to.
posted by riotgrrl69 at 6:14 PM on August 21, 2006


They probably scoff at the idea that anything must be experienced before it's understood, but given that so many things humans care about (love, knowledge, reason) are the same, I'm given to believe that, if one religion isn't true, at least something like religion is.

dude, don't bogart that shit, pass it over here
posted by riotgrrl69 at 6:17 PM on August 21, 2006


*sigh*... Oh, it's yours. I've had enough of it.
posted by koeselitz at 6:19 PM on August 21, 2006


Third, I always wonder why people who are pissed off at the christians tend to quote the bible at them. In doing so, they ignore the fact that religion claims to be experiential; that is, that religion claims to be something that cannot be understood until one has experienced it. They probably scoff at the idea that anything must be experienced before it's understood, but given that so many things humans care about (love, knowledge, reason) are the same, I'm given to believe that, if one religion isn't true, at least something like religion is.

You're missing the point - people who retaliate against christians with biblical verse don't care whether religion is true or not or experiential or not. They're just observing hypocrisy in others. Unless you object to the need for coherent beliefs, or do not believe in the literal truth of the bible (by no means is such a belief necessary to religious experience, but many claim it anyway), you should respect that.

This story is nutpicking, yes; it's simply an unfortunate dismissal which most certainly has other reasons behind it and someone made a really REALLY bad choice when it came to the firing. You better believe they're getting sued.
posted by mek at 6:25 PM on August 21, 2006


23skidoo, you are being disingenuous! At no point have I claimed that the context of this verse is not important! Indeed, I have said that the context formed by the surrounding verses reinforces the obvious meaning of the verse in question! Unless you make your argument more explicit I say good day to you sir! Good day!
posted by riotgrrl69 at 6:35 PM on August 21, 2006


"Your analogy (and cellphones original argument about "history books" I was mocking) is rather poor. "

Tkchrist, you misunderstand me - I was simply advocating that the founding documents and constitution make better guides for living one's life than the bible does.

I've got no dog in your and cellphone's race.
posted by stenseng at 6:37 PM on August 21, 2006


koeselitz

My gripe with religion being cast as an experiential phenomenon is that the arguments of apostates are dismissed outright as coming from one who who never truely believed.

Religion, then, tends to become a self-reinforcing fallacy. The Christian can cite Josh McDowell's apologetics while dismissing opposing views out of hand. The Mormon can cite the Book of Mormon while ignoring its critics, who have never felt the fire-in-the-belly spirituality that gives their prophet's revelation primacy above all others.

My own cycle of fallacy broke by degrees as I matured, and began to comprehend the inhumanity of the Biblical God.

A God who would condemn entire nations and peoples to hell along with (certain verses suggest) unbaptized children, simply because they never had the opportunity to hear and understand His revelation.

A God who would ruin the life of Job, one of his most devoted servants, and rubber-stamp the murder of his children, all in service of a bet made with the Devil.

The more I matured, the greater my understanding of God became, and the more I realized that I wouldn't even *vote* for such a being, let alone trust or worship it!
posted by The Confessor at 6:38 PM on August 21, 2006


Look religious folks, believe what you want. Whatever set of disjointed ancient tribal myths youre partial too, great, do whatever you want regarding defining and living up to the associated codes to those beliefs. I dont even care that much that my taxes let your peculiar gathing places escape being taxed. Jesus wants you to love everyone, terrific, i think its a great idea. Looking around the world today, dont really think the message is getting through, and I'm pretty sure its not the 3% of who arent into your whole supernatural worldview.

So we godless heathen seculars are too arrogant to see your real message, the important one (not the 'kill all the gays' and 'stone the unchaste women' smokescreen but the true messages that you claim really motivate your beliefs. You know, the 'the love this leper' and 'peace with that enemy' . Are those the real messages then that I'm just spitting on with my amusement at this horribly offensive post?

Fine, then prove it? Make the peaceful world happen, cure the lepers, protect the downtrodden and stop the horror running rampant in this fucked up world. Until then, leave us few non believers alone, and if we make fun of you when you do something stupid, don't throw that stone cause youre living in a glass house. Can't you just stop playing the victim and stop shoving your lovely exclusionary utopia down our throats? I mean, do we really have to buy into your beliefs for you to feel validated? Ok, which ones then?

Sorry all for spewing on endlessly and offending a lot of you, I just miss the zone of privacy where we didnt constantly argue about this.
posted by Gaius Gracchus at 6:38 PM on August 21, 2006


Redneckistan

I like it. I shall use it.
posted by c13 at 6:49 PM on August 21, 2006


koeselitz writes "Citing one-sided and inflammatory verses from a diverse religious text to provoke outrage is bullshit, whether you're Jerry Falwell or orthogonality. I don't know how a reasonable discussion was supposed to follow from such a beginning."


I didn't write the verse. Paul did, in his epistle to Timothy.

I didn't cite the verse to fire a woman: the First Baptist Church did.

From the link:
The First Baptist Church dismissed Mary Lambert on August 9 with a letter explaining that the church had adopted an interpretation that prohibits women from teaching men. She had taught there for 54 years.

The letter quoted the first epistle to Timothy: "I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."
All I did was change the verse to the King James Version from the New International Version. (When I quote the Bible, I always quote the KJV, because I like the sound of it.)


So why, koeselitz, are you blaming me? Just to derail a thread that asks questions you find inconvenient about a cow you'd prefer remained sacred?

Feel free to explain that this First Baptist's take isn't the position of all Christian churches, but also feel free to explain that in the context of a growing and militant fundamentalism in America.
posted by orthogonality at 6:51 PM on August 21, 2006 [1 favorite]


Here's the pastor's press release.


Seems to be much more behind this than the verse.
posted by konolia at 7:09 PM on August 21, 2006


A good translation takes into account *why* Paul said what he said when trying to discern what his words mean.

You seem to have confused "translation" with "op-ed".
posted by riotgrrl69 at 7:26 PM on August 21, 2006 [1 favorite]


« Older How do you solve a problem like Gerard Manley...   |   Elvis Is Everywhere Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments