Mono- sayign my arguments arent as weak as they have been called is insultign how?
Kristen,
"The problem is, it seems too much that you want to simply justify you position, not seek an objective Truth rrespective of how it makes you feel." is an insult. Instead of addressing my arguments, you are attributing motives.
I address both. When I address the arguments Im usually dismissed or accused of Sexuism though. I mean you've alreayd said I cant discuss this or that, that pretty well leaves the Hebrew and your motives. Now you wan tthta removed to.
When I address the arguments, you balk. When I address you motives, you balk. This really is a "Shut up Zarove" thread. You don't want to discuss Egalitarian Concerns with amyone ho disagrees with you, period.
If I DID address the arugments ( I did in the past so I know) you'd consider that insulting too.
What do you rreally expect me to do?
Until your emotionally able to disatnce yourself from a need to be right on this and see why others say what they do, and perhaps admit error oin yoru stidies and these biases, then of coruse I'm limited ot talking about your motivations and the Hebrew Language constructs.
Of do you just want me to see the light, admit I was wrong, and that women shodu. preahc, part of the curse was women getitng prengnant mroe often, and anythign at all to do with anyhtign else is Sexusm and dominaiton of Women?
I'm pretty Isolated in these arugments to begin with by your insistance that everyhtign I say agaisnt anythign is insulting.
Until you can see that, why should I go on talking to you?
You don't. If I address thre arguments you call that inslting to. Heck, you think it sinusulting when I say women shoudl not be allowed ot Preach. I can't even state my position without insulting you.
I can't tell you that I reject the reinterrpetation of 2 Timothy because it goes agsint the obviosu reading and seems mor elike wordplay, and the whole "But lets dig deeper int he Bible" rhetoric is the resort of those who simpy want to make the Scriptures say what they want wihttu that beign an insult either.
The only way I can tlak to yu and not insult you is to agree, and see yoru arugments as solid and well thought out. But, they often aren't. THis is most particuallry True when you try to assign meanign to texts based on a half digested Hebrew word root.
No, I did not sya tghat to insult you, but please ttry to see how actulaly impossible any sort of discussion with you is on this mater as you insist on discussing it but refuse to allow anyone to disagree iwht you on it at all without that disagrement itslef beign an insult.
Read the past threads. Read what you and Metacrock have said to me abotu my motives or how you've both attakceed me for basiclaly not buyign into your fanciful expanations of ascripture. yes I said fanciful, sorry I inslted you, I shoudl have said brilliant exegesis.
But if I do that it implies tha its right, or at lats is valid, and dons't that undermien my poisiton? Oh wait, my position is wrogn and driven by me beign sexist...
So ypu'll forgive me for not takign the whole idea htat I'm insultign to mean that I'm actually beign insulting. Anything, literally anything I say is an insult here, unless I change my midn and agree with you.
Should I respond in kind? Ok, here goes:
The problem is, it seems that you want to simply win the argument, and nothing less than my full capitulation will satisfy your need to win.
Except this is not True for me.
What I want is you for you do three things.
1: Stop abusign the Hebrew Language. I took years ot study it and while I am not a Hebrew Shcolar, and nver claimed ot be, do know that the way ypu just look up a word in a reerence book and assume that a definition ro root of said word proves some point that your makign is just disasterous linguistically.
I get pretty upset when anyone does htis to Hebrew. I get upset with Atheists do this pto prove their point. Hebrew never, ever rests on a singular word but needs the whoel sentance, for starters.
Liekwise, when you base some sort of intepretaiton ont he Origional Hebrew and I note that no on seems othave come to this conclusion before the 20th cenury, instead of dismissing what I've said at lats coem up with a plausable reason why anyone whoudl buy into that interrpetation.
2: Stop tryign to reinterrpet Historical attitudes and beelfis along Modern lines.
Peopel in the past woudl nto asosciate fertility with a Curse, no matter hwo you feel as a modern American woman livign in the 21st Century.
And again,this is not realy just this issue and I have told Atheists or other Christians the same thign when they try to do the same sort of arugment. When Neoconservatives claim that I shoudl no be a Monarhcist becuase God hates Monarhcy and use 1 Samuel chaptr 8 to prove this I do the same thing. You shoudln't interpret the Bible accordign to Modern Culture but on its own terms.
3: And again, I am not tryign to be rude, insltign, or attakc you personally, but I do feel that your too emotionally investe din this issue to really discuss it and do think its not Healthy for toyyou to be so engaged in it yurself precicley becuase you want to see things a certain way and will thus be prone to interpret things accordign to your own desires.
This is somethign everyone seems ot do form time to time but that we all need to grow out of.
No, it snot personal and no, it snot an insult. But OI do think you start with your conclusion that you want to prove and hten just seek arguments to support your contention, rather than basing your conclusiosn on detailed and dispassionate study, and I think this becuase of the way you approach the topic.
Its what I lie to cal the Lawyer Syndrome. You are actign as a Lawyer. Eithe rprosecution ro defence it doens't mater. You want to argue for a cause, and like a Lawyer your willign to filter or present information in a certain way as to get the results you want. We all know Lawyers do this to win cases, not to get at Truth, but the same applies to Acadmeic matters as well.
And htis is, ultimatley, an academic matter.
While you may see htis as offensive of me, I at leats have the Ability to say my stand is base don concern for the Truth and for the welfare of Souls, and that principle guides my posts, not a need to dominate owmen, win arguments, or punish someone. So no, I'm not beign Rude, I am tring to help you, its just that my helpo is the same help I got when I did my own studies, a very sharp critical reception whenevr I trid to force sometignt o be what its not.
Thats why I prefer classical Ediucation over modern education.
As it Says n the Proverbs, multiple tims (This is not a wuote) that we should be mindful of corection, have a multitude of counselors, and allow reproof.
That is what I am supplying here.
That wasn't fair, was it? Instead of addressing your arguments, it attributed (bad) motives to you.
But when I address your arguments, you consider that insultign and become angry. Likewise, there was no logical reason for you to assume my motivation was bad, any more so than Metacrock assumign I hold my position becuase as a SOuthern Male I cant stand the idea of Empowerign women as Equals as I feel like it weakens me. And in Metacrocks case it makes no sense in that I don't really come off as a Southern Male at all. Anyone who imagines me wearign a bseball cap, wearign T-Shirts and Blue Jeans, and watchign NASCAR or goign huntign on weekends has obviously never spoken to me for over five minuets and listened.
In your case, its the same.
I DID Address your arugments and even that was counted as an insult. And it sobvious form the manner in which your studies are ocndicted that they are driven by a desire ot justify a beleif rather than find what was beleivd by the authors of the origional text. You seek validation of a claim, not simply the Doctriens of the text itself, as can be shown by a need to fidn defnitionf of Hebree words, or how ytou adamantly refuse to accept the possibility hat the Curse of Eve wa snot increased fertility.
And I did address thosse arguemnts.
But before any argument can ruly be made, before any discussion held, the other party must be receptive. And despite how I will come off to thos ehwo faour yoru position as the one who is closed minded, the Truth is, Im not. I woudl hange my beleif if I was shown they were wrong, and have in the past. But I've not been. I've been shown fanciful wordplay and reinterpretationof Scripture that rests on tryign to mak it say the opposite of what it obviously says.
I'm also not attributing bad motives to you, I'm attributing an error in judgement inthat you simply place he Cart before the Horse. You Start at your conclusion then argue fro it, rather htan just look at the evidence and let it lead you.
And this is the problem I have in this regard.
Until you can stop doing stuff like this, we cannot have a conversation.
Butm why dont you stop beign offended whenever anyone says anything to you that disagrees?
