Sentences with phrase «n't women teach»

Then there are the dangerous questions that challenge the tradition itself, like why can't women teach men, why can't I teach your children in Sunday school if I'm not straight, what's this head of the household crap, why can't we have marriage equality, why is the church so myopic, and isn't it possible that the whole human race is connected and one and that there is no separation illustrated by the ancient paradigm of heaven and hell.

Not exact matches

They're doing it through dozens of workshops held in community centers, libraries, YMCA's, and municipal buildings, where anywhere from 40 to 60 women (and sometimes a few men) work their way through a two - hour curriculum that teaches them how to figure out how much they should be paid, how to make their case to an employer, and how to gracefully exit a negotiation that might not be going well.

Based in NYC, the women's activewear brand founder says her mother taught her not to chase monetary success.

Diana: Kode With Klossy taught me that a young woman like me should never give up my dreams and to ignore the negativity anything related to «women can't code» or «coding is too much work for a woman».

Women are taught that their importance comes only through having a husband who holds the priesthood (which they have erroneously been denied) and having lots of children and not from obtaining their education as their career should «be solely in the home».

The Christian Bible was written by men, not women, and then rewritten time - and - again over the last several hundred years, by men, when the Bible failed to support the teachings of those «men».

Wrestling involves even more physical contact with all the positioning and grabbing, and our culture both secular and non still tries to teach boys that they shouldn't be physically rough with women, which thus inevitably creates a mental handicap.

since this woman entered a Catholic Church to be a part of their service of worship, she shouldn't be surprised that they follow the doctrine they believe in — namely, that someone openly unrepentant of what the Catholic Church teaches is sin should not partake of communion.

Women were not taught how to read and write is was strictly reserved for males.

I don't think that its feasible to expect everyone to follow NFP, though I'm personally a huge proponent and believe women need more education on their bodies and menstrual cycles, and condoms while not «moral» persay or in line with the church's teaching are a much better option than hormonal birth control or Plan B as they are simply a barrier method not an abortificant.

I won't judge this woman on how devout she thinks she is, but I truly think that she needs to understand the teaching behind this theology and how contraceptions actually disrespects a women's body.

How is it that an inspired woman could write scripture (e.g., Mary's song), and an inspired woman could determine for both a king and a high priest whether something is scripture (e.g., the prophet Huldah in 2 Kings 22 and 2 Chronicles 34)-- or at least could do these things in the time of the Old Testament — but an inspired woman can not now teach about God?

As for the first part of that same verse, «I do not permit a woman to teach» I have no idea.

It was Christ who encouraged the fair treatment of women... God who commands us not to neglect the poor and to feed orphans and widows... God who insisted that field owners leave part of the crop behind to be picked up by hungry gleaners... God who said men should not take advantage of one another by charging interest... Christ who attacked the Pharisees for their rigid thinking and superiority complex toward Samaritans... How are my values inconsistent with the teachings and actions of God?

I am a women in her late 40's and was on the birth control pill for many years not realizing the great increase risk of breast cancer the pill causes or even the church teaching on birth control.

«In my faith community, popular women pastors such as Joyce Meyer were considered unbiblical for preaching from the pulpit in violation of the apostle Paul's restriction in 1 Timothy 2:12 («I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent»),

What preachers once taught as biblical truth — slavery is sanctioned by God; women aren't allowed to preach; gambling and dancing are sin — is now rejected by many churches.

I wish I could talk to Paul and find out what he really meant by his «women must not teach men» teaching.

So when Paul (inspired to say) said «I do not permit a woman to teach, or exercise authority over a man» I accept that.

In my opinion, I do not think this woman is a practicing catholic since she is ignoring this basic teaching of the catholic church.

The bible does not teach men's dominance over women.

But what I've always wondered is, if there is an ultimate truth, why doesn't God stick it smack in our faces, so we can't make these mistakes of whether women can preach and teach men, whether blacks can marry whites, whether slavery is OK, and whether we can worship with instruments or not?

Education... creationism would supplant evolution, all sciences that could possibly come in conflict with creationism would be forbidden, all children would be required to pray and be educated in fundamentalist Christianity, women teachers would not be permitted to teach males, girls only, etc..

A candidate isn't going to get anywhere with most conservative evangelicals if they support a woman's right to chose, or if the candidate supports strict separation of church and state, and maybe even opposition to teaching Creationism is going to lose their vote.

I can futher give other religious teachings that say that we are not judges (ok, Judge Judy is), but we stand as imperfect creatures who do not have the right to judge nor condem our fellow man (and woman) if their beliefs do not align themselves with ours.

Reacting to the result on Wednesday, Archbishop of Sydney Dr Glenn Davies said in a video posted online: «Although this won't prevent me from continuing to teach that marriage, in God's good design, is between a men and a woman... the reality will be, in a very short period of time, our Parliament will legislate for same - sex marriage.»

«Tts 2:3 - 4 The aged women likewise, that [they be] in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,»!!

Do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.»

It seems disingenuous to equate his teaching with «those who abuse women, children...» don't ya think?

And is spite of what your church has taught you... God has blessed many sexual unions where marriage was not involved, and a great many more beyond the church notion of one man and one woman for life.

The teaching and authority of women over men is not to be assumed just as it is not to be assumed that anyone teach or have authority over anyone else.

I learned about equality even from Paul, who taught that with the resurrection, something radical had changed — not merely ontologically, but functionally — in the relationships between slaves and masters, Jews and Gentiles, men and women, rendering those whose identity was once rooted in hierarchy and division brothers and sisters in Jesus Christ instead; who put a radical gospel - spin on the Greco - Roman household codes, breaking down the hierarchies so that slaves and masters, wives and husbands were charged with submitting «one to another» with the humility of Jesus as their model; who taught that power was overrated and that service will be rewarded; who surrounded himself with women he called «co-workers.»

What is less clear to me is why complementarians like Keller insist that that 1 Timothy 2:12 is a part of biblical womanhood, but Acts 2 is not; why the presence of twelve male disciples implies restrictions on female leadership, but the presence of the apostle Junia is inconsequential; why the Greco - Roman household codes represent God's ideal familial structure for husbands and wives, but not for slaves and masters; why the apostle Paul's instructions to Timothy about Ephesian women teaching in the church are universally applicable, but his instructions to Corinthian women regarding head coverings are culturally conditioned (even though Paul uses the same line of argumentation — appealing the creation narrative — to support both); why the poetry of Proverbs 31 is often applied prescriptively and other poetry is not; why Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent the supremecy of male leadership while Deborah and Huldah and Miriam are mere exceptions to the rule; why «wives submit to your husbands» carries more weight than «submit one to another»; why the laws of the Old Testament are treated as irrelevant in one moment, but important enough to display in public courthouses and schools the next; why a feminist reading of the text represents a capitulation to culture but a reading that turns an ancient Near Eastern text into an apologetic for the post-Industrial Revolution nuclear family is not; why the curse of Genesis 3 has the final word on gender relationships rather than the new creation that began at the resurrection.

For example, it emphasizes passages like 1 Timothy 2:12 («I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man; she must be silent») while ignoring others like 1 Corinthians 11:5 («every woman who prays or prophecies with her head uncovered disgraces her head»).

If women believe they are not capable of thinking theologically, or leading and teaching in the church effectively, then that stereotype perpetuates an unfortunate cycle in which women are hesitant to even try.»

To look upon those prayer wheels not (as some of us were taught) as instruments of «vain repetition,» but as outward and visible signs of the intention to pray without ceasing, can perhaps lead iconoclasts to more compassionate reflection on the sacramental impulse and on the place of objects — statues and stained glass and candles and altar cloths, beads, bouquets, and kneeling cushions in needlepoint stitched by some faithful woman as her own act of participation in the prayers of the church.

If the overwhelming response by women to this book has taught me anything it's that Christian women are not going to take that phrase for granted any more.

What it tried to teach me when i was a kid, people of color were punished by god, women could only go to heaven if their husband invited them, there's alot to the mormon religion that has not been let out, makes one wonder.

«The second person of the Trinity is revealed as the eternal Son not daughter; the Father and the Son create man and woman in His image and give them the name man, the name of the male... God appoints all the priests in the Old Testament to be men; the Son of God came into the world to be a man; He chose 12 men to be His apostles; the apostles appointed that the overseers of the Church be men; and when it came to marriage they taught that the husband should be the head.»

But that could have been the southern baptist in him thinking women need to be silent not teaching loving quietly.

She felt guilty if she did not sing in the choir, attend all women's meetings and teach Sunday school.

I'm thinking of the basic Calvinism that says God loves his children, but not all are his children... and the intrinsic misogyny of keeping women silent, disqualified from teaching and leadership.

He was making the case that men are «hardwired» to protect women and women are «hardwired» to be protected by men, and so the lifeboats on Titanic prove that women should not teach or lead in the church.

Since the Catholic Church teaches that she is not authorized to ordain women, there was no question of recognizing the validity of the orders of the women involved.

There was a story of a woman got fired from her teaching job at a Catholic school for being pregnant and not married.

One thinks not only of the personnel that the Jesuits and other religious institutes devoted to teaching young men but also of the teaching congregations of religious women, such as the Ursulines, who educated young women in virtue and learning.

I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.»

Women should be quiet, listen, be obedient and definitely not teach.

It teaches women «how not to let a man come on to you» or «how to save yourself» and how purity is attached to her nether regions, rather than teaching men «how not to be an objectifying a-hole», or teaching that a person's worth is attached to their individuality.

Why do we hear sermon after sermon about Paul's instructions that «I do not permit a woman to teach or have authority over man» while never hearing a peep about Paul's declaration that «Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons»?