Why are so Many Women Unhappy?

[Woody]

Them women might be unhappy because they thought that feminist hoopla would be just the thing. But they were pushing against a wall that God Himself erected, and that can be a tiring thing I spose.

When men are men and women are women everybody's happy except Satan, but we don't care what he thinks anyhow.

oG

Og ... Are you trying to put women in 'their' place ... wherever that is?

[Woody]

Quote:

If that your best attempt at theology you better keep your day job

Wait a minute ... let me check with someone who has a day job and see what she says.

[Tom Wetmore]

Now this does not imply some type of victorian male dominance in the relationship, but more on that later...

But I am guessing within 5 more posts, that charge will be made...

Mark :-)

Actually I was thinking a bit further back... say the Neanderthal era...

[Woody]

[aldona]

Quote:

If that your best attempt at theology you better keep your day job.

When the first pain relief for women in childbirth was developed (ether, chloroform) and Queen Victoria was one of the first to avail herself of this innovation, there was a chorus of disapproval from theologians everywhere. They unanimously declared that this went against God's explicit decree that women were ordained to suffer pain in childbirth.

I have a feeling that if you were alive at that time, your voice would have been added to their number.

And I'm quite happy to stick to my day job, thank you very much - I've found (by observing those around me) that the more involved someone gets in theology, the more sarcastic, insulting, dismissive and disrespectful of others' points of view they become.

aldona

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: aldona

I hope you're working hard in the sweat of your brow to ensure that your land is producing plenty of thorns and thistles.

After all, that is also part of the same curse stated by God in Genesis.

If you pull out those weeds, you are going against the direct word of God.

aldona

If that your best attempt at theology you better keep your day job.

g

And you, my friend, better get back up on the roof and stay there.

No theological stretch in Aldona's read of Scripture. It is most clearly the pronouncement of the curse of sin. God was simply identifying the consequences of their disobedience. It certainly wasn't proscriptive and was hardly a statement of His ideal for them. Those who seek to keep women under the thumb of God's curse, or more exactly, their own thumb, will ignore the full statement for what it really is - a curse upon us all.

So do you prefer to set your standards at the level of a curse or look a bit higher?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I've found (by observing those around me) that the more involved someone gets in theology, the more sarcastic, insulting, dismissive and disrespectful of others' points of view they become.

that's for certain, and especially on this forum, and it's not only in the Theology section.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

So are you experiencing dissociative disorders?

And what would *you* know of dissociative disorders? HUH? I know a lot more than you do, and THAT's a fact.

[olger]

Olger smiles at Rudy's mock outrage and puts yet another log on the fire in cold but beautiful Ohio.

g

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Teresa, you sure gitcher tail in a knot pretty quick over nothing.

I know you been abused somehow, you keep referring to it. I'm dang sorry that happened, and I had been there I would have tried to stop it. But the time comes when we have to let go of the past in order to move forward.

oG

Would you PLEASE stop talking like some cowpoke hick from the sticks? It's annoying. You DO know proper English, don't you?

[olger]

Reckon I do Sister.

One knot's enough,

g

[olger]

You know you don't mean that

oG

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

You know you don't mean that

oG

I MEAN EXACTLY WHAT I SAY HERE.

[olger]

Thanks sis...uhh, ma'am..

Validating the title of this thread won't fulfill anybody neither.

Having more fun than an Adventist should be allowed to have,

olger

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I hate me. I had to give up my puppy yesterday.

[phkrause]

I hate me. I had to give up my puppy yesterday.

Oh no rudy! really? Sorry to hear that. But you need to do what is best for you.

pk

[olger]

I don't hate nobody. I still love you (as a Christian brother). Now cheer up .

g

[Stan]

olger and rudywoof, please take this private if you want to continue.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Originally Posted By: rudywoofs

I hate me. I had to give up my puppy yesterday.

Oh no rudy! really? Sorry to hear that. But you need to do what is best for you.

pk

I didn't want to, pk. My mom has Newly right now. I couldln't sleep and I couldn't take my meds when I needed to and everything fell apart on me yesterday. I had to call my doctor because I didn't know what to do or where to go or where I was or anything.

And now Olger is making fun of me. Please stop. please please please...

[olger]

I never wanted to talk to Rudy in the first place, she jumped in on a dialogue between me & Teresa . I still like Rudy.

This is a good thread that Carlos started.

g

[Woody]

Olger ... Just stop it. (As Stan would so eloquently state.)

[phkrause]

I didn't want to, pk. My mom has Newly right now. I couldln't sleep and I couldn't take my meds when I needed to and everything fell apart on me yesterday. I had to call my doctor because I didn't know what to do or where to go or where I was or anything.

And now Olger is making fun of me. Please stop. please please please...

As far as the dog is concerned, you did what you needed, no one should blame you for that. Sometimes things just don't go as we expect. As far as olger, just ignore him, some have no tact or consideration of others feelings.

pk

[olger]

Don't know bout no dog, but I still think the thread's an interesting topic. Brother Medley thought so too.

Mohler's article reminds me of a 2004 article by Kelly McGinley.

http://www.thebereanchronicles.com/commentary_kelly_009.html

regards,

og

[Nan]

The topic is interesting.

Some of the responses have been supercilious, sarcastic and inappropriate.

That is my opinion anyway.

[Twilight]

The question I have is this:

If the statement that man would rule over his wife was just a mention of consequence in Genesis, then why did Paul state that the woman should be subject to the husband (in the Lord)?

Eph 5:22 Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.

Maybe he was just a "chauvanist" and this is how we deal with inspired counsel?

We diminish the counsel, rather than look at ourselves and ask honest questions?

Mark :-)