And I bet you thought it was only Islamic fundies who were this backward.
Sunday school teacher fired for being female
Since 1946, Mary Lambert has been a member of the First Baptist Church in Watertown, and for the past 11 years, she’s been the Sunday school teacher.
But, last Thursday Lambert received a letter from the Diaconate Board telling her that she was dismissed from her position because the board had adopted the scriptural qualifications for Sunday school teachers. In short, this prohibits women from teaching men.
“I was astonished, absolutely astonished to pick up and read that kind of a letter without being talked to ahead of time about the possibility,” said Mary Lambert.
The letter Lambert received says, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became sinner.”
LaBouf
Link to the LaBouf Blog — add your comments!
Official Le Bouf Comment on Church Website
Most of what he says seem to be about how crummy it was that this was made public,
David, you didn’t even read what Teletycoon wrote, did you?
See, my interpretation was that he was encouraging people to think for themselves. What was yours? Oooh, this is an issue with the bible too, different people have different interpretations. It’s all relative to OUR past experiences and our outlook on life. Ever think of that…that nothing has one interpretation? Maybe each person has been given a brain to think with, not be led and sheep-ed?
Maybe that’s the problem with women teaching….they teach people to think, not to be stupid. Women are better at language. Women are more sensitive to other’s feelings. Women are more agile at story and verbal. Maybe women will try and teach men to think? That must the the “problem”, don’t you think?
Meanwhile, the the bible is really pack of myths, a compilation of a LOT of stories from other cultures. It’s a collection of a lot of stuff — some changed some not — going back to Zorastrianism, and perhaps further. (Do you even KNOW about this?) Have you read much?
http://www.meta-religion.com/World_Religions/Zoroastrim/zoroastrism.htm)
Seems to me, if you really want the “word of god” you should go to a more primitive source…..don’t you think? The bible is more like taking the word of dozens or hundreds of people (no one knows for sure) who were writing and slanting as human’s do, and editing, and translating with their own perspectives. So, it’s more like “hear-say” and gossip and innuendo. How is it different than other “must read religious texts”? In many, the world over, the stories are similar. Even pagan myths and Native American myth, and Aboriginal myth, and Inuit myth have many of the same “lessons” although the characters change. Maybe this is because all writing and all stories are based on the HUMAN CONDITION, don’t you think?
So, tell me again, how well versed are you in the ancient texts that are the basis of the bible, and what ancient languages are you fluent in reading? Why should I take YOUR opinion as authority? Why should anyone take ANY of these numbskull pastors words as “truth”? Why should anyone take anyone elses word, either?
I’m sorry. David, the fact that you jumped in to agree with the moron cited in the blog post, then, later, in defense claimed that you “respect women” makes you a foaming salted slug brain in my opinion. You are giving lip service to “respect”, not respecting. Maybe you should learn the difference. But then again, it’s obvious that there are a lot of things you need to learn.
Disclaimer–I stopped reading around comment 23.
I don’t agree with David but I think he makes the good point that if you claim to believe something, you need to follow through and not just obey the convenient parts.
As someone else has pointed out, it’s all about context. The men (and they were men) who wrote the Bible came from the early Jewish rabbinic tradition. They often used words to express ideas in an abstract way and would be shocked to learn that anyone was taking their words literally, as some fundamentalist Christians do.
They weren’t trying to express literal truths. They were trying to express more abstract philosophical concepts in everyday language. Named got it right in comment 23. Christ wasn’t talking about a literal place when he talked about the Kingdom of Heaven. He was describing a state of mind in which people loved, respected, and cared for each other.
meetsy, I’m not quite sure how this became a debate on the validity of the bible, but we assuredly agree on that issue. The point I’ve been trying to make is that the bible itself that is clearly misogynistic and I support the pastor for making that very clear. Don’t mistake that for endorsing the bible’s views.
#19, Gibson. I hope we aren’t playing with semantics here, but Jesus claiming to be the son of god isn’t a lesson. It is an introduction. Just as when I introduce myself as Mr. Fusion, Mrs. Fusion’s husband.
I think the correct way to phrase it is not that the Bible is misogynistic, but that those who wrote it were.
The bible is flawed. Written by people who are inherently flawed, created by a committee, translated a hundred times, re-written even more.
It’s still interpreted in so many different ways. Entire religious factions are based on a single paragraph in the Bible. Some schmuck over emphases something said in the Bible, and they end up creating a “spin off” church separate from everyone else OF THE SAME RELIGION. How many different churches and religions have there been based on different texts in the bible?
All this book does is separate people.
Christpwned
Re 36 – At least Christians aren’t killing each other in the streets (well, outside Ireland) – all we’ll do is argue with each other. Which gives us less time to argue with you. You should be happy.