At the moment you surely are making moral judgements based on an arbitrary system - your own moral code. If God is by definition holy and righteous and wise then his morality will be infinitely superior to ours.
So your saying that God is the one that decides whats moral, thus our concept of morality is useless, so if God says we should kill our neighbors, it then becomes good to kill our neighbors, regardless of the fact we think its wrong to kill our neighbors. This is akward, becuase it means our own intuition of right and wrong is completely useless, as God could tell us to do the exact opposite tomorrow.
And at the end of the day, morality has no meaning if it does not have consequences.
WHAT?? Ability does not grant right. Just because a person can kill a child and get away with it doesn't mean its right. By this logic, the only reason why God is morally superior is because he has the power to bring about consequences for actions.
It draws a line of authority, but not of superiority. It shows differences in roles, not differences in status. In fact, man gets the tougher role here as his position of authority has to be acted out sacrificially. It is more costly than the position of the woman.
It is sexist to say that only men will fulfill certain roles in society, and only women will fulfill others.
http://www.answers.com/sexism&r=67/ the second definition, "Attitudes, conditions, or behaviors that promote stereotyping of social roles based on gender." So it is sexist, like I said.
Submission does not necessitate a difference in value, but rather a difference in role. In a job, your boss would have authority over you, but that doesn't make him a more valuable human being. Christ is in submission to the Father, but is no less valuable or glorious. He is equal in standing. In the same way, men and women are equally valuable before God. They just have different roles. Don't import your own definition of what submission entails over the Bible's description of what it entails.
That still fits the definition of sexism. Superiority can mean many things, but the point that a gender was used to draw the authority line is sexism.
Having a boss doesn't mean its your less of a human being, but saying only males will be allowed to be boss is sexism, which is what is going on.
Also, how can you draw a line of authority, but not superiority? So if it became law that only males are allowed to drive, but females are just as important as males, its not sexist, because we value them equally.
Who is in a better position to justify an action: God or man?
If that God says for you to do immoral things, then I would say man.
If your going to say God decides morals, then you have a probelm on your hands. Namely, that if God creates morality, then it is merely an arbitrary system that can change whenever God wants. If this is the case, then killing could become morally correct if God says its morally correct, which goes against our our basic moral principles. Now, if there is a moral code seperate from God, then God isn't the highest authority on morality, which means that God has to follow rules, which means he's not all powerful. And if God created the moral code, he would then have the power to change it whenever he wants.
This fits very well with 1 Timothy 2:8-15, which itself is based on Genesis 2-3. God has established an order and authority structure for mankind and the church, with God in ultimate authority over man, who is in a position of authority over woman, who is designated as man's companion and helper. The authority that mean wields, however, is to be sacrificial and loving, not domineering. It's to be modelled over the authority that Jesus has over the church i.e. he is the teacher, the leader, but he was also the one to die on behalf of the church.
That, however is still sexist. It draws a very clear line of God > Man > Woman. And I don't care if it was sexist out of "love", its immoral.
Submission is not a negative thing in this context because we are taught that Christ himself submits to the Father.
Its a negative thing because its morally wrong to think that women are in submission to men, because that means that men > women. That is sexist, any way you look at it.
Thats great, but I fail to see how the following passage could EVER be justified, regardless of what was going on at the time.
1 Corinthians 14:34: the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.
You mean alcohol is more dangerous in large doses. Studies have shown that alcohol in a moderate amount is one of the better things for longterm health (Keyword being moderate).
Its not actually Communism, though they call it that. True Communinsm is a classless society with a pure democracy, which they don't have. The correct term is Socialism, which was first designed to be used as an intermediate step between Capitalism to Communism.
Its called a joke. When you read it, it usually causes laughter, though not to those with no sense of humor. And just because you don't get it doesn't mean you have to say that it was a 13 year old Linux elitist.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, how can you draw a line of authority, but not superiority? So if it became law that only males are allowed to drive, but females are just as important as males, its not sexist, because we value them equally.
If your going to say God decides morals, then you have a probelm on your hands. Namely, that if God creates morality, then it is merely an arbitrary system that can change whenever God wants. If this is the case, then killing could become morally correct if God says its morally correct, which goes against our our basic moral principles. Now, if there is a moral code seperate from God, then God isn't the highest authority on morality, which means that God has to follow rules, which means he's not all powerful. And if God created the moral code, he would then have the power to change it whenever he wants.
That, however is still sexist. It draws a very clear line of God > Man > Woman. And I don't care if it was sexist out of "love", its immoral.
Its a negative thing because its morally wrong to think that women are in submission to men, because that means that men > women. That is sexist, any way you look at it.
Thats great, but I fail to see how the following passage could EVER be justified, regardless of what was going on at the time.
1 Corinthians 14:34: the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.
You mean alcohol is more dangerous in large doses. Studies have shown that alcohol in a moderate amount is one of the better things for longterm health (Keyword being moderate).
Its not actually Communism, though they call it that. True Communinsm is a classless society with a pure democracy, which they don't have. The correct term is Socialism, which was first designed to be used as an intermediate step between Capitalism to Communism.
Its called a joke. When you read it, it usually causes laughter, though not to those with no sense of humor. And just because you don't get it doesn't mean you have to say that it was a 13 year old Linux elitist.