Ephesians 5, 21-32

[houseofsaul]

This is only your opinion. Christ was about equality. A wife is not like a child. A child is under the authority of both his parents until he reaches maturity. In the Bible, God is referred to as “He”. It does not mean God has a gender.

God is male. We have been instructed since the beginning of time and in Jesus day and in Revelation that God is our Father. Can a woman be a Father, No.

The Bilbe was not meant to be written in unisex. If it were we would have no need for words like Father, Mother, wife, husband, women, men, male, female.

The Bible does not tell the husband to treat his husband like a child and submission does not mean your husband is the dictator. The only ones that have a problem with the word submission is the ones who want to ignore the rest of the bible. You must read the New Testament in its entirety to understand what our role is.

Learn in silence…this is a form of submission (respect for authority)

Submission to Husbands is also respect for authority…God made him the head of the household, which gives him a place of authority.

 

[LightBound]

Thanks for reading my profile and noticing I am in the RCIA. Doesn’t make me Bible illiterate. You think I haven’t been investigating, inquiring, discerning the teaching and the beliefs of the Catholic Church. This is not a hobby or a pasttime, or a birthright.

Never said Slavery was right, simply stated it is still alive in culture today.

The church interprets scripture less literally than the fundalmentalists and the Protestants eh, what about transubstantiation. The catholics believe the Eucharist becomes the Body and the Blood of Christ. The fundamentalists and Protestants state they symbolize the Body and the Blood of Christ, so which Church took the literal stance there.

2 Timothy 3:15-17
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

The Bible was written instructions on how to one can obtain salvation and how to live a Christian life. God is not stuck in the culture of biblical times. You say the bible was written for the culture of those times yet want to choose certain verses that still apply, i.e. salvation, the ten commandments. What about the book of Revelation, the book of the Bible that we are currently living in and what is yet to come, was John mistakenly describing the end times and Heaven for that culture only.

Supposedly, the Gospel of John was not written until 100 A.D. which is why we were so dependent on the Apostles and their successors to pass down teachings and traditions. So was the culture of the time in 100 A.D. the same as 33 A.D.? I think not…look at the difference in our world from the 1970s til today. Definitely not the same USA.

The Church did not decide what was now okay to eat. God told Peter in a vision, it was okay to eat what he once considered unclean.

Acts 10:9-16
9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

We are also instructed in dress:

I Timothy 8-10

9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

St Paul never once insinuated that women were to be treated like animals. We also get instructions on how men should treat their wives. Thise who treated their women with disrespect or like animals were not and are not following the teachings of the Bible.

Ephesians 5:24-26
24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word

Colossians 3:19
19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.

I stand by what I said before.

I do not think you have been lax at investigation, inquiring, or discerning the teachings of the Church. But, In all charity, you are approaching these verses about submission with a Baptist mindset, and that’s not unusual since that was your previous faith tradition. However, we as Catholics rely not only on Sacred Scripture, but Sacred Tradition. Both are interpreted for us by the Magisterium, since personal interpretation leads to to division (as you pointed out in a previous response about all the different Protestant denominations that spring up) and they have spoken on the submission issue. You will find, that since the Church has existed since AD 33, she knows and understands that the very Bible that was approved as our Sacred Scripture was written over a period of centuries, by various authors who, inspired by the Holy Spirit, saw and wrote things through the eyes of their respective times and cultures.

I hope during your RCIA journey, you investigate the riches of the Encyclicals written in the past 120 years. They bring the wealth and knowledge of our ancient faith into the today’s world, so that one can apply biblical teaching as it’s meant to be understood to the situations of our lifetimes. That will greatly assist you in reading the Bible through Catholic eyes.

With that being said, I stand by what I have said in all my posts upon this thread.

 

[houseofsaul]

I see that you’re in RCIA. Reading some of John Paul ll and Pope Benedict XVl’s encyclicals would benefit you greatly. You need to realize that the Catholic Church interprets scripture less literally than fundamentalists and other Protestant denominations. Our Magisterium and our Pope’s know that certain things change within the course of time and culture. Obviously the truths of salvation don’t change, but just as we don’t follow certain the rules listed in the OT (such as pork being forbidden to eat or forbidding the wearing of mixed fiber clothes), we do follow things such as the 10 Commandments. The Church determines those things for us. It started with our first Pope, St Peter and continues on with an unbroken chain of Popes, each who guide Catholics through their respective times on Earth. Hence, the writing of Encyclicals to further educate us on the interpretation of Scripture. We don’t live in the 1st Century Middle East, so issues of culture and time are brought current for us in the wisdom of Encyclicals. St Paul lived in a time where women were property and less in value to some than animals. He was inspired by the Holy Spirit, but he had to write in the culture of his time. Just as John Paul and Pope Benedict have written to things relevant to the present time.QUOTE]

As a side note are you insinuating by saying Reading some of John Paul ll and Pope Benedict XVl’s encyclicals would benefit you greatly, that these writings take precedence over Holy scripture, The Bible?

 

[LightBound]

LightBound;9709949:

I see that you’re in RCIA. Reading some of John Paul ll and Pope Benedict XVl’s encyclicals would benefit you greatly. You need to realize that the Catholic Church interprets scripture less literally than fundamentalists and other Protestant denominations. Our Magisterium and our Pope’s know that certain things change within the course of time and culture. Obviously the truths of salvation don’t change, but just as we don’t follow certain the rules listed in the OT (such as pork being forbidden to eat or forbidding the wearing of mixed fiber clothes), we do follow things such as the 10 Commandments. The Church determines those things for us. It started with our first Pope, St Peter and continues on with an unbroken chain of Popes, each who guide Catholics through their respective times on Earth. Hence, the writing of Encyclicals to further educate us on the interpretation of Scripture. We don’t live in the 1st Century Middle East, so issues of culture and time are brought current for us in the wisdom of Encyclicals. St Paul lived in a time where women were property and less in value to some than animals. He was inspired by the Holy Spirit, but he had to write in the culture of his time. Just as John Paul and Pope Benedict have written to things relevant to the present time.QUOTE]

As a side note are you insinuating by saying Reading some of John Paul ll and Pope Benedict XVl’s encyclicals would benefit you greatly, that these writings take precedence over Holy scripture, The Bible?

Absolutely not! What I’m saying is that they will help you to understand how the Catholic Church interprets certain things in the Bible and how we are to understand those topics and concerns in our lives today. That’s one of the beauties of the Catholic Church- it’s a living Church, with a living Magisterium and a living Pope to teach us and guide us on our salvation journey.

 

[houseofsaul]

I do not think you have been lax at investigation, inquiring, or discerning the teachings of the Church. But, In all charity, you are approaching these verses about submission with a Baptist mindset, and that’s not unusual since that was your previous faith tradition. However, we as Catholics rely not only on Sacred Scripture, but Sacred Tradition. Both are interpreted for us by the Magisterium, since personal interpretation leads to to division (as you pointed out in a previous response about all the different Protestant denominations that spring up) and they have spoken on the submission issue. You will find, that since the Church has existed since AD 33, she knows and understands that the very Bible that was approved as our Sacred Scripture was written over a period of centuries, by various authors who, inspired by the Holy Spirit, saw and wrote things through the eyes of their respective times and cultures.

I hope during your RCIA journey, you investigate the riches of the Encyclicals written in the past 120 years. They bring the wealth and knowledge of our ancient faith into the today’s world, so that one can apply biblical teaching as it’s meant to be understood to the situations of our lifetimes. That will greatly assist you in reading the Bible through Catholic eyes.

With that being said, I stand by what I have said in all my posts upon this thread.

Baptist mindset, Pentecostal Mindset, makes no difference. How can read the Bible and ALL the verses about the role of women and not believe that the woman in her submissive role is merely given the respect due her husban, her God and her Church. Submission is not some archaic term. Did you not submit yourself to the teaching of the Church? Do you not submit yourself to the Law of the Land? It’s just when some women read the word Submit to husbands that they they get all bent out of shape.

Let’s not forget that when the authors of the Bible were writing said books, in your own words, they were God inspired, so that means God’s words were being written down. I am confident that when he inspired those writings he knoew that not only the people of the present time would be reading His Living Word, but also our generation and the generations to come. So considering the Word of God Archaic or out of touch ioth the times, seems to me to be the one with a closed mind.

I do not wish to read the Bible in Baptist eyes or Catholic eyes, but through the eyes of its author, God.

 

[houseofsaul]

houseofsaul;9712444:

Absolutely not! What I’m saying is that they will help you to understand how the Catholic Church interprets certain things in the Bible and how we are to understand those topics and concerns in our lives today. That’s one of the beauties of the Catholic Church- it’s a living Church, with a living Magisterium and a living Pope to teach us and guide us on our salvation journey.

That should always follow the Living Word of God.

 

[severus68]

Thanks for reading my profile and noticing I am in the RCIA. Doesn’t make me Bible illiterate. You think I haven’t been investigating, inquiring, discerning the teaching and the beliefs of the Catholic Church. This is not a hobby or a pasttime, or a birthright.

Never said Slavery was right, simply stated it is still alive in culture today.

The church interprets scripture less literally than the fundalmentalists and the Protestants eh, what about transubstantiation. The catholics believe the Eucharist becomes the Body and the Blood of Christ. The fundamentalists and Protestants state they symbolize the Body and the Blood of Christ, so which Church took the literal stance there.

2 Timothy 3:15-17
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

The Bible was written instructions on how to one can obtain salvation and how to live a Christian life. God is not stuck in the culture of biblical times. You say the bible was written for the culture of those times yet want to choose certain verses that still apply, i.e. salvation, the ten commandments. What about the book of Revelation, the book of the Bible that we are currently living in and what is yet to come, was John mistakenly describing the end times and Heaven for that culture only.

Supposedly, the Gospel of John was not written until 100 A.D. which is why we were so dependent on the Apostles and their successors to pass down teachings and traditions. So was the culture of the time in 100 A.D. the same as 33 A.D.? I think not…look at the difference in our world from the 1970s til today. Definitely not the same USA.

The Church did not decide what was now okay to eat. God told Peter in a vision, it was okay to eat what he once considered unclean.

Acts 10:9-16
9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

We are also instructed in dress:

I Timothy 8-10

9 I also want the women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, adorning themselves, not with elaborate hairstyles or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, 10 but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.

St Paul never once insinuated that women were to be treated like animals. We also get instructions on how men should treat their wives. Thise who treated their women with disrespect or like animals were not and are not following the teachings of the Bible.

Ephesians 5:24-26
24 Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything.

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her 26 to make her holy, cleansing[a] her by the washing with water through the word

Colossians 3:19
19 Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.

I stand by what I said before.

An example of how you take Bible verses literally is in your reference to Peter’s vision in Acts. Please read a good, Catholic commentary on that. You have to continue reading and not fix on that passage only. The vision was about God telling Peter to go to all, not only to the Jews because of Peter’s cultural reluctance to mix with non Jews.

 

[severus68]

We h

ave some (even a few on CAF) who even take the position that women are subordinate to men. Paul did say to the effect that under Christ all are equal.

So is a woman’s place (if married), in the kitchen serving her lord and master, her husband? Where is an unmarried woman’s place then?
Your statements about women would fit well in a sermon in a fundamentalist Protestant church.

You insist you know everything about Catholicism, I am a Catholic born and bred and I still learn.

 

[LightBound]

LightBound;9712455:

That should always follow the Living Word of God.

Sigh. I submit to the authority of the Catholic Church. As a practicing and faithful Catholic, that is what you are required to do. That means submitting to the authority of the Church’s interpretation on what Bible verses are literal and which are not.

I don’t mean to sound condescending towards you, but you are still seeing things through a Protestant lens. I realize you have done much studying and discerning, but you still have much to learn about the Church and what it means to be Catholic and view things through Catholic eyes. Which, if you understand and believe the Church is the one true Faith, you will believe that viewing things through Catholic eyes means viewing things through God’s eyes.

The thread has derailed a bit here and topics on submission had been discussed, cussed, and discussed again ad nauseum in the past. That being said, God bless you on your journey into the Church.

 

[houseofsaul]

An example of how you take Bible verses literally is in your reference to Peter’s vision in Acts. Please read a good, Catholic commentary on that. You have to continue reading and not fix on that passage only. The vision was about God telling Peter to go to all, not only to the Jews because of Peter’s cultural reluctance to mix with non Jews.

I understand that. But he was also telling Peter that nothing he made was unclean.

So when you take the bible literal about transubstatiation, your wrong?

 

[severus68]

This is only your opinion. Christ was about equality. A wife is not like a child. A child is under the authority of both his parents until he reaches maturity. In the Bible, God is referred to as “He”. It does not mean God has a gender.

God is male. We have been instructed since the beginning of time and in Jesus day and in Revelation that God is our Father. Can a woman be a Father, No.

The Bilbe was not meant to be written in unisex. If it were we would have no need for words like Father, Mother, wife, husband, women, men, male, female.

The Bible does not tell the husband to treat his husband like a child and submission does not mean your husband is the dictator. The only ones that have a problem with the word submission is the ones who want to ignore the rest of the bible. You must read the New Testament in its entirety to understand what our role is.

Learn in silence…this is a form of submission (respect for authority)

Submission to Husbands is also respect for authority…God made him the head of the household, which gives him a place of authority.

God has no gender, God is a spirit. You are mixing things up with the Trinity. I would would want to learn from the ones who are learned about Catholicism, I am sure most others would to.

 

[houseofsaul]

God has no gender, God is a spirit. You are mixing things up with the Trinity. I would would want to learn from the ones who are learned about Catholicism, I am sure most others would to.

Please explain my mix up? Jesus called God Father. (male) Jesus is also God, God’s Only begotten son (male), Thew Word became flesh in the form of a man (male)

 

[houseofsaul]

God has no gender, God is a spirit. You are mixing things up with the Trinity. I would would want to learn from the ones who are learned about Catholicism, I am sure most others would to.

Didn’t realize I had to be learned in Catholicism to post on here. Do you know all there is to now about Catholicism. I wasnt trying to put a denomination on how I interpret Father, Son, Man?

 

[severus68]

We have some (even a few on CAF) who even take the position that women are subordinate to men. Paul did say to the effect that under Christ all are equal.

Galatians 3:27-29

We are all equal to accept Christ and enjoy our salvation and bask in His Love. But as women we still have our place.

If we didnt have our place why does the church refuse to allow women priests? Because the bible tells us where our women are to be in the church, and it is not in authority.

1 Corinthians 14:34
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.

BTW the Church states that it is not the one who does not allow women priests but that Christ chose only males to be His apostles with priests their successors so it God who set that rule. I am stating it very simply, I am sure someone can explain it better.

 

[LightBound]

God has no gender, God is a spirit. You are mixing things up with the Trinity. I would would want to learn from the ones who are learned about Catholicism, I am sure most others would to.

And who would be more learned about Catholicism than the Popes? That’s what we’ve been trying to tell you. We don’t go with the Bible alone and personal interpretations of the verses. :banghead: You need to let go of Sola Scriptura. I pray that RCIA will assist you in doing so.

 

[houseofsaul]

Galatians 3:27-29

We are all equal to accept Christ and enjoy our salvation and bask in His Love. But as women we still have our place.

If we didnt have our place why does the church refuse to allow women priests? Because the bible tells us where our women are to be in the church, and it is not in authority.

1 Corinthians 14:34
Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.

BTW the Church states that it is not the one who does not allow women priests but that Christ chose only males to be His apostles with priests their successors so it God who set that rule. I am stating it very simply, I am sure someone can explain it better.

So the Church follows Christ’s teaching on women priests, but the Church does not follow the ?teachings on the role of women>

 

[LightBound]

Didn’t realize I had to be learned in Catholicism to post on here. Do you know all there is to now about Catholicism. I wasnt trying to put a denomination on how I interpret Father, Son, Man?

Come on now, there’s no reason for sarcasm. We’re trying to help you understand that Catholicism includes the Sacred Tradition and our Magisterium and the Pope, too. We don’t just go with the Bible alone.

 

[houseofsaul]

And who would be more learned about Catholicism than the Popes? That’s what we’ve been trying to tell you. We don’t go with the Bible alone and personal interpretations of the verses. :banghead: You need to let go of Sola Scriptura. I pray that RCIA will assist you in doing so.

RCIA can in no way assist me or convince me that God the Father, God the Son, does not have a gender. If he were not to be seen to have a gender as we understand it, why would Jesus teach us to pray Our Father, knowing in our minds we would vision someone of the male persuasion. Jesus is God, came in form of man, not woman, thus he is male.

Jesus is the same today, yesterday and forever.

 

[houseofsaul]

Come on now, there’s no reason for sarcasm. We’re trying to help you understand that Catholicism includes the Sacred Tradition and our Magisterium and the Pope, too. We don’t just go with the Bible alone.

Although it seems that when you have a discussion with someone of the Catholic faith and you bring up scripture, all they want to do is bring up Sacred Tradition and our Magisterium and the Pope.

Should not Scripture, The Living Word of God take precedence?

 

[severus68]

I understand that. But he was also telling Peter that nothing he made was unclean.

So when you take the bible literal about transubstatiation, your wrong?

Please, you cannot support your stand by referring to a seperate issue. I was taught about the Real Presence when I was young by religious. I still do not pretend to be a theologian.

The reference to unclean was a reference to how Jews viewed no Jews.