Posts by AGuest

174

Good Reasons To Hate Every Weak And Ex-Jehovah Witness.

by AuntConnie in

1. my husband's time is finite, it's wasted on spouses arguing over money, sex or family mattters with stupid home visits.. .

i hate people's constant open hand for money, it's the weak individuals asking others to pull their weight.

my family worked extra hours instead of begging the strong members for district assembly money, cat food for seven cats or tiny little rag-a-muffins weiner dogs.. .

AGuest

I think someone just doesn't quite realize she's not in Kansas...

Peace!

A slave of Christ,

SA, representing the Lollipop Guild (or, given the time, perhaps the Lullaby League )

9

Due to that saying about "the best laid plans of mice and men"... I never make New Year's resolutions, dear V7 (peace to you!). I prefer the "by the seat of my pants" approach to a new year - LOLOL!

Peace!

A slave of Christ,

SA

60

Genesis 3:16 - As to ALL Women... or One Woman? A Favor, Please...

by AGuest in

may you all have peace!.

so, as some of you might know (or discern)... or not... i am not your usual submissive/in subjection kind of girl.

given what some apparently expect of women... as wives, daughters, female friends... and in general... i was curious about the greater fulfillment of genesis 3:16, because many are of the belief that it applies to all women as to all men... (including those that aren't their husbands)... and not the just one being addressed at the time (eve as to adham).. personally, other than paul's position on women teaching in public (which was borne of what was occurring in the region at the time, due to by-then jewish culture and roman occupation)... and peter's admonishment for wives to submit themselves to their own husbands... that i know of nothing that validates a woman being in subjection to anyone other than her own husband, and even then such "subjection" is not puerile or unrestrained (so as to just be a given), but borne of love and respect for her husband (in which case it should not be difficult)... who is obligated to honor her, as well.

AGuest

All Christians are to live under and submit to authority.

Yes, but that isn't exactly what this thread was meant to be about, dear V7 (peace to you, dear one!). Rather, it was an inquiry into the basis of women submitting/being in subjection to men... who are not their husbands: the basis for that "authority" (as taught by the WTBTS).

Regardless of gender, all are to submit to government and authorities insofar as that submission does not counter higher authority (God).

Understood. Everyone pretty much has to submit to the superior authorities that are their relevant governments, penal systems, legislature, etc.... or risk consequences, yes. This isn't as much about submission in general, though, but about the "authority" the WTBTS cites to say that women are in subjection to men, in general. Even, as dear Bobcat pointed out... grown women to their minor sons simply because the latter has undergone baptism. Unfortunately, you may have misread/misunderstood MY position... and point. Certainly others here have.

The scripture calls for mutual submission of husband and wife. When this breaks down, marital failure is inevitable.

No argument from me on that. But again, what I'm trying to get to is under what "authority" is a woman to submit to a man who is NOT her husband... as taught by the WTBTS. I raised this issue because I know there is no basis for it... other than custom/tradition/culture. However, SOME believe it is based on scripture/the Bible (because that's how the WTBTS presents it) and I wanted those who (although having left the WTBTS or contemplating doing so) might still believe that there is some scriptural/biblical basis for that to THINK... and ask themselves whether there truly IS.

And so, rather than just say there is NOT, I am asking those who DO believe it to be valid based on scripture/the Bible... to share with me the basis THEY believe exists to justify it. I am doing that to perhaps encourage them to look it up for themselves and SEE that there isn't. You know, one can be shown better than one can be told. And again, not trying to undermine anyone's marital relationship, not at all. This was even about submission in the husband/wife relationship but as to men and women who are NOT married.

But you are correct: we are all in submission/subjection to something, no doubt. I just wanted folks to contemplate whether it's what they have been led to BELIEVE it is... or, on the other side (as to men), whether such RIGHT (to have women in subjection) is based on what they might think it is... or is just the product custom/culture/and tradition... used to foment more mind control.

Again, thank you for your comment... and peace to you!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

57

Do you know where you gun is?

by purplesofa in

jw
friends

to gunowners:.

is your gun in a place where a child, unstable person, mentally ill person, suicidal person, or stranger cannot get to it?

do you ..right now, know an unstable person that owns a gun?

AGuest

Oooooooh... dear Beks... no you DI'N'T! LOLOLOL!

Peace, chile'!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA, who hopes you don't get mad if I take a few (well, several, actually) steps to the left... and out of the line of "fire" - LOLOLOL! I mean, I love you, girl, 'til the wheels fall off... which might just happen after that comment. 'Cause, girl, didn't you hear dem mens say they got GUNS?? Talk about 'cher cahones! You surely ain't lackin' 'em, girl! LOLOLOL!

60

Genesis 3:16 - As to ALL Women... or One Woman? A Favor, Please...

by AGuest in

may you all have peace!.

so, as some of you might know (or discern)... or not... i am not your usual submissive/in subjection kind of girl.

given what some apparently expect of women... as wives, daughters, female friends... and in general... i was curious about the greater fulfillment of genesis 3:16, because many are of the belief that it applies to all women as to all men... (including those that aren't their husbands)... and not the just one being addressed at the time (eve as to adham).. personally, other than paul's position on women teaching in public (which was borne of what was occurring in the region at the time, due to by-then jewish culture and roman occupation)... and peter's admonishment for wives to submit themselves to their own husbands... that i know of nothing that validates a woman being in subjection to anyone other than her own husband, and even then such "subjection" is not puerile or unrestrained (so as to just be a given), but borne of love and respect for her husband (in which case it should not be difficult)... who is obligated to honor her, as well.

AGuest

LOLOLOL and I "hear" you, dear Wuz, girl (peace, my sistah!). Yeah, my dear husband is more my dear, dear (dearest) friend than a "husband" (as that word is often viewed by some who look beyond the civil contract and intimate physical relationship that makes him so: "You're my husband/wife and so you HAVE to..." whatever it is such one believes the other HAS to do... besides exercise fidelity, etc.).

Thank you for your comment, dear one, and peace to you!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

60

Genesis 3:16 - As to ALL Women... or One Woman? A Favor, Please...

by AGuest in

may you all have peace!.

so, as some of you might know (or discern)... or not... i am not your usual submissive/in subjection kind of girl.

given what some apparently expect of women... as wives, daughters, female friends... and in general... i was curious about the greater fulfillment of genesis 3:16, because many are of the belief that it applies to all women as to all men... (including those that aren't their husbands)... and not the just one being addressed at the time (eve as to adham).. personally, other than paul's position on women teaching in public (which was borne of what was occurring in the region at the time, due to by-then jewish culture and roman occupation)... and peter's admonishment for wives to submit themselves to their own husbands... that i know of nothing that validates a woman being in subjection to anyone other than her own husband, and even then such "subjection" is not puerile or unrestrained (so as to just be a given), but borne of love and respect for her husband (in which case it should not be difficult)... who is obligated to honor her, as well.

AGuest

Let the community decide whether you are Christian

Ummmm... I don't think that's up to the community, actually. But I understand your chagrin about it. My advice to you would be to consider the words at Luke 11:13.

or gracious.

Well, I can answer that one for them: sometimes I am... sometimes I am not. I am not all the time, perhaps even not most of the time. But I have never said I was. "Graciousness" is one of those "social graces" that my father probably didn't teach me enough about. He was too busy teaching me how to change tires, change oil, change brake pads (AND brake shoes!), set timing... and rebuild engines... so that as small as I am I might not find myself stranded on the highway and have to rely on someone else to "rescue" me. Being gracious wasn't going to help me jump my battery.

The Ivy League is an easy target for someone who would never be accepted at an Ivy, let alone do the academic work.

(Smile) I was accepted to both UCLA and USC, Band, with partial scholarships to both... during my junior year. I was not your regular high school student but a member of the M.A.F.I.A. (Male and Female Intellectual Association), an independent study program because my GPA was 3.97-4.00. I never made it to either because during my senior year I (1) found out my mother, whom I had only gotten to know over the past few years, was dying of cancer; (2) was raped (by a fellow band member) and so got pregnant; (3) had my daughter three weeks before my mother died (who died on my 18th birthday, sorry); and (4) buried my mother a week after my 18th birthday. I chose not to abort my daughter or give her up for adoption... but to suck it up and take care of that little piece of life (who is now one of my greatest joys).

You don't know me, ma'am. You don't know where I would be accepted... or by whom. Now, please... move on... before you get your feelings hurt even more. Because you KNOW you can't take it.

A slave of Christ,

SA

60

Genesis 3:16 - As to ALL Women... or One Woman? A Favor, Please...

by AGuest in

may you all have peace!.

so, as some of you might know (or discern)... or not... i am not your usual submissive/in subjection kind of girl.

given what some apparently expect of women... as wives, daughters, female friends... and in general... i was curious about the greater fulfillment of genesis 3:16, because many are of the belief that it applies to all women as to all men... (including those that aren't their husbands)... and not the just one being addressed at the time (eve as to adham).. personally, other than paul's position on women teaching in public (which was borne of what was occurring in the region at the time, due to by-then jewish culture and roman occupation)... and peter's admonishment for wives to submit themselves to their own husbands... that i know of nothing that validates a woman being in subjection to anyone other than her own husband, and even then such "subjection" is not puerile or unrestrained (so as to just be a given), but borne of love and respect for her husband (in which case it should not be difficult)... who is obligated to honor her, as well.

AGuest

IMO the opposite problem is at least as likely. Ex-JW women may continue to act out the whole subjection role becasue that is how they were taught to behave from childhood.

YES, C! AND ex-JW men may also continue to expect it! YES! This was my point, but on another basis: they probably do it due to conditioning, yes, but there are a lot of things we were taught to do by the WTBTS... and for some, this thing, perhaps all of their lives... that we still justify by saying it's "scriptural"... when it is NOT. Yes?

If, though, one still sticks to unnecessary tenets, like being in subjection to men... and particularly men who AREN'T their husbands... and men requiring/expecting/needing such... are those who do TRULY free?

Or is the WTBTS still holding some influence over them... whether they see this or not?

Like I said, some thoughts on this came up in my mind and heart and I asked... and I received my answers. But I just wanted others who might need to to consider it for themselves. I'm not trying to get any wives to go on strike or burn their bras or anything like that. And I am certainly not saying men... and particularly husbands... don't deserve respect. Not at all.

I'm just trying to get us to take a look at why we might still "fall" for something that has absolutely NO basis in the manner we were told it did.

That's it, that's all.

A slave of Christ,

SA

60

Genesis 3:16 - As to ALL Women... or One Woman? A Favor, Please...

by AGuest in

may you all have peace!.

so, as some of you might know (or discern)... or not... i am not your usual submissive/in subjection kind of girl.

given what some apparently expect of women... as wives, daughters, female friends... and in general... i was curious about the greater fulfillment of genesis 3:16, because many are of the belief that it applies to all women as to all men... (including those that aren't their husbands)... and not the just one being addressed at the time (eve as to adham).. personally, other than paul's position on women teaching in public (which was borne of what was occurring in the region at the time, due to by-then jewish culture and roman occupation)... and peter's admonishment for wives to submit themselves to their own husbands... that i know of nothing that validates a woman being in subjection to anyone other than her own husband, and even then such "subjection" is not puerile or unrestrained (so as to just be a given), but borne of love and respect for her husband (in which case it should not be difficult)... who is obligated to honor her, as well.

AGuest

Hi again Shelby, I think scripture has been used to influence many. But, my theory is that male domineering attitudes may predate scripture.

Hi, again, to you, too, dear xelder (and, again, peace to you!). Yes, I agree with that. I'm trying to understand the "scriptural" basis the WTBTS uses to support it. Of course, there is none... but I'm not sure all understand that.

People will tend to dominate the physically weaker and vulnerable. Not only was he almost always stronger than her, but she had to be pregnant and take care of little ones. This made her (and still does) have to submit to the jerk and his power play. Hebrew culture seems to have been full of this.

Yes, and with regard to a natural dominance/submission due to physical differences, I can understand how this could come about. But, again, Eve's craving would be for HER husband and HER husband would dominate HER... and Peter stated wives were to be in subjection to their OWN husbands. So where is all of that melarkey about women just being in subjection to men in general... and particularly in a time when physical differences don't really matter all that much... finding place in the WTBTS... other than in the insecurities of a bunch of men (and perhaps a desire to be pleasing to men, in general, and not just their own husbands by some women)?

I am just trying to find out if such thinking is not the brainchild of insecurities, etc., versus an actualy prophesy as to the relationship between men and women, as taught by the WTBTS.

Again, thank you... and peace to you!

YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

60

Genesis 3:16 - As to ALL Women... or One Woman? A Favor, Please...

by AGuest in

may you all have peace!.

so, as some of you might know (or discern)... or not... i am not your usual submissive/in subjection kind of girl.

given what some apparently expect of women... as wives, daughters, female friends... and in general... i was curious about the greater fulfillment of genesis 3:16, because many are of the belief that it applies to all women as to all men... (including those that aren't their husbands)... and not the just one being addressed at the time (eve as to adham).. personally, other than paul's position on women teaching in public (which was borne of what was occurring in the region at the time, due to by-then jewish culture and roman occupation)... and peter's admonishment for wives to submit themselves to their own husbands... that i know of nothing that validates a woman being in subjection to anyone other than her own husband, and even then such "subjection" is not puerile or unrestrained (so as to just be a given), but borne of love and respect for her husband (in which case it should not be difficult)... who is obligated to honor her, as well.

AGuest

I posted comments concerning what the WT would call "headship" here. The comments were based on what Numbers 30 says about vows. I think this covers some of my answer to your first question, at least from a Biblical standpoint.

Thank you, dear BobCat (peace to you!). I read your other comments and they make sense... for those who adhere to the Old Law (i.e., maybe Jews and certainly the WTBTS, who have resurrected that "head" of the wild beast. The WTBTS doesn't necessarily use the Law Covenant, however, as much as they use the statement to Eve... and I'm trying to understand how any who may have gotten over the WTBTS (or say they have), see that verse addressing anyone other than Eve.

Someone might say it applies to all women because of the whole birth pangs thing, but not all women experience such (I did with my first, didn't with my second), whether with vaginal birth or C-section. So, does it only apply to those who HAVE birth pangs?

Your other comments re the WTBTS' views as to "all baptized males as having headship over females," is kind of what I'm talking about, too! Where did they GET that, other than their own false teachings??

History, for its part, shows that male headship has often been tyrannical. So there is some basis for taking "dominate" in an overbearing way.

Yes, I understand that... for everyone, perhaps, except those who call themselves "anointed," "FDS," "GB", etc. I think perhaps some of those who might still believe in that tenet should take a moment and stop and think and ask themselves why they still do believe in it.

Thank you, again, dear BC, and peace to you!

Your servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

60

Genesis 3:16 - As to ALL Women... or One Woman? A Favor, Please...

by AGuest in

may you all have peace!.

so, as some of you might know (or discern)... or not... i am not your usual submissive/in subjection kind of girl.

given what some apparently expect of women... as wives, daughters, female friends... and in general... i was curious about the greater fulfillment of genesis 3:16, because many are of the belief that it applies to all women as to all men... (including those that aren't their husbands)... and not the just one being addressed at the time (eve as to adham).. personally, other than paul's position on women teaching in public (which was borne of what was occurring in the region at the time, due to by-then jewish culture and roman occupation)... and peter's admonishment for wives to submit themselves to their own husbands... that i know of nothing that validates a woman being in subjection to anyone other than her own husband, and even then such "subjection" is not puerile or unrestrained (so as to just be a given), but borne of love and respect for her husband (in which case it should not be difficult)... who is obligated to honor her, as well.

AGuest

The idea of any woman being in subjection to any man - husband or not - is a foolish anachronism.

I agree, C. Yet, some do expect that and find themselves... mmmmmm... unable to deal with much different. I realize that for the WTBTS it's just another tactic to foment mind control, but I marvel that many, even women, seem to "like" it, even want it. I was curious because the justification used is the prophecy to Eve. But that statement was made to her as to her relationship with HER husband. And even Peter's reiteration was with regard to a wife's OWN husband.

Yet, I was reading the thread about "weird" stuff at Bethel and there were comments about how some women were told to where skirts (had to), and how the young men sometimes behaved, etc., and I wondered... now that folks are out of the WTBTS, on what do they base this tenet if they still accept/look to it?

A slave of Christ,

SA