Excellent! Well done to you. What a fine opportunity.
Loz x
i gave a lot of talks as a jw.
beeing the only elder in a cong for almost three years, i've been on the platform at every meeting (also at ca and dc).
but thats long ago.
Excellent! Well done to you. What a fine opportunity.
Loz x
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.
One of my adult daughters had a husband Cofty, a fine ministerial servant. It later emerged that this man had obsessions with sexual depravity. But back when they were married, he took issue with a handbag (purse for our American friends) she had bought. It was a clutch bag, pretty, with bright colours. He forbade her to take it to the KH. One night she took it to a meeting since it matched her outfit. He called in the elders and she was disciplined.
Now, that interpretation of 'subjection' I find completely unloving and motivated by power seekers.
Loz x
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.
Do you mean the bible - also know as "a beginners guide to misogyny".
No, Cofty, I meant the WTBS, the false religious organisation. And no "Loz doesn't think a wife should be in subjection to her husband..." Please don't put words in my mouth.
Loz thinks a member of Christ's body should be in subjection to Christ.
Loz x
To add: Couldn't we all see the damage this did not only to women in the WTBS but more so to the elders who lost honest sight of themselves?
thanks to this website and jwfacts, i have come to learn the "infamous" ttatt.. i've had soooo many emotions the last couple months.. (fyi: i've been baptized since '95 third gen jw, elder father and every other member of my family is a regular pioneer).
i was wondering, like dealing with greif : are there 5 stages for dealing with ttatt?.
I went through the stages. It is a loss, hence the grief. One hell of a journey, but acceptance and freedom is wonderful, and worth it.
Loz x
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.
Our congregations, the ones that I was a member of, made it clear that baptised sons took the lead at home in a father's absence. They prayed over meals rather than the mother, and led any home bible studying. Once separated a woman had to understand that she came under the elders headship if there was no son in the house. Appalling misuse of intended loving scriptural guidelines. All to make men, especially elders feel more important and powerful than they needed to be, and women feel less than they are.
Loz x
interesting report on dawkins radio interview.. .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9082059/for-once-richard-dawkins-is-lost-for-words.html .
PSac-The article pointed out the hypocracy ( and arrogance) of that particular comment by Dawkins ( that most christians don't even know the name of the first chapter/book in the NT - Gospel of Matthew, though some world argue that it should be Mark- and that Dawkins himslef didn't know the name of the fist chapter od the Darwinist "bible" The Origin of Species when he said he did).
Yes, this was the point I think.
Loz xinteresting report on dawkins radio interview.. .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9082059/for-once-richard-dawkins-is-lost-for-words.html .
Double post
Loz x
interesting report on dawkins radio interview.. .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9082059/for-once-richard-dawkins-is-lost-for-words.html .
Welcome Cedars, I thought so too.
Loz x
interesting report on dawkins radio interview.. .
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9082059/for-once-richard-dawkins-is-lost-for-words.html .
Interesting report on Dawkins radio interview.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9082059/For-once-Richard-Dawkins-is-lost-for-words.html
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.. .
No, I'm not buying this either.
Loz x