oleg@birtch.UUCP (Oleg Kiselev) (12/30/85)
No apologies.... As for Biblical quotes, the difficulty is that I don't own a Bible. I used to, but after reading it I have elected to save the space on the bookshelf for books more important and dear to me. So, there is a problem with availability of sources (maybe my memory is getting weak -- I doubt it!) As for St. Thomas, I have read him and enjoyed some of his stuff ( such as a proposition that Satan does not exist). I also remember a few remarks about inferiority of women. In general, Christian philosophers of that period tended to think of women as non-human, as God's mistakes, as defective men, other wonderful ideas. As for quotes, I'll start with this: "For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is head of the church" Ephessians 5:23 More on that in January (he-he-he, thought you a rid of me? ;-) when I'll have time to look up all the wonderful things about your religion you'd rather ignore (and that's excluding Inquisition and Dominicans) -- Disclamer: I don't work here anymore - so they are not responsible for me. +-------------------------------+ Don't bother, I'll find the door! | STAY ALERT! TRUST NO ONE! | Oleg Kiselev. | KEEP YOUR LASER HANDY! |...!{trwrb|scgvaxd}!felix!birtch!oleg --------------------------------+...!{ihnp4|randvax}!ucla-cs!uclapic!oac6!oleg
john@cisden.UUCP (John Woolley) (12/31/85)
In article <218@birtch.UUCP> oleg@birtch.UUCP (Oleg Kiselev) writes: >No apologies.... > >As for Biblical quotes, the difficulty is that I don't own a Bible. I >used to, but after reading it I have elected to save the space on the >bookshelf for books more important and dear to me. So, there is a problem >with availability of sources (maybe my memory is getting weak -- I doubt it!) > >As for St. Thomas, I have read him and enjoyed some of his stuff ( such as >a proposition that Satan does not exist). I also remember a few remarks >about inferiority of women. In general, Christian philosophers of that period >tended to think of women as non-human, as God's mistakes, as defective >men, other wonderful ideas. > >As for quotes, I'll start with this: > > "For the husband is the head of the wife, as > Christ is head of the church" > Ephessians 5:23 > >More on that in January (he-he-he, thought you a rid of me? ;-) when I'll have >time to look up all the wonderful things about your religion you'd rather ignore >(and that's excluding Inquisition and Dominicans) Even though he says "No apologies", I have to assume Mr. Kiselev has backed down from his original proposition that St. Paul and St. Thomas claim sexual pleasure is evil. Otherwise I'm at a loss to explain why he changed the subject in this last posting to the status of women. If I'm wrong, Mr. Kiselev, if you still maintain (without being able to support your claim with quotations) that Christianity holds pleasure to be evil, please say so instead of just leaving us to guess. And I'd certainly rather not ignore Dominicans. Some of my best friends... -- Peace and Good!, Fr. John Woolley "The heart has its reasons that the mind does not know." -- Blaise Pascal
garys@bunkerb.UUCP (Gary M. Samuelson) (12/31/85)
In article <218@birtch.UUCP> oleg@birtch.UUCP (Oleg Kiselev) writes: > As for Biblical quotes, the difficulty is that I don't own a Bible. I > used to, but after reading it I have elected to save the space on the > bookshelf for books more important and dear to me. How openminded of you. My shelves have room for books of opposing views; why don't yours? (Rhetorical question; answer not required). You must be a wonder. You read the bible (some of it? once?) and knew enough about it to decide that it wasn't worth two inches of shelf space. > As for St. Thomas, I have read him and enjoyed some of his stuff (such as > a proposition that Satan does not exist). I also remember a few remarks > about inferiority of women. In general, Christian philosophers of that period > tended to think of women as non-human, as God's mistakes, as defective > men, other wonderful ideas. I guess even Christian philosophers make mistakes. Saying "in general" admits that other Christian philosophers didn't share the notion that women were inferior. You appear to think that the ones which thought women inferior had a better understanding of Christianity than the ones who thought otherwise; why do you think that? And how about non-Christian philosophers? Didn't they also, "in general," think of women as inferior? If so, you can't blame Christianity for an attitude which was prevalent regardless. > As for quotes, I'll start with this: > > "For the husband is the head of the wife, as > Christ is head of the church" > Ephesians 5:23 This is one of the favorite quotes of opponents of Christianity. It is, of course, taken out of context. 5:21: "Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God." First Paul says that every Christian is expected to be willing to submit to every other Christian. He then gives examples of how husbands and wives, children and parents, servants and masters are to submit one to another: 5:22: "Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord..." 5:25: "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it..." Most people don't seem to read this far. Maybe the rest of the chapter is missing in some Bibles? Christ gave his all for the church. And husbands are supposed to love their wives as much as Christ loved the church, a hard act to follow. 6:1: "Children, obey your parents in the Lord..." 6:4: "And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath..." Children are supposed to obey their parents, but parents have to be reasonable. 6:5-8: "Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh...not with eyeservice, as men- pleasers, but as the servants of Christ...with good will doing service as to the Lord, and not to men, knowing that whatever good thing ay man doeth, the same shall he receive from the Lord, whether he be bond or free." In our culture, we have "employees" instead of "servants" and "supervisors" instead of "masters," but the principles are still applicable. 6:9: "And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening, knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him." On the last, that God is no respecter of persons, Paul says this to the Galatians (3:28) "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female; for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Sounds pretty egalitarian to me. >(and that's excluding Inquisition and Dominicans) Good. One less straw man to worry about. I call it a straw man because no one that I know of has advocated the practices of the Inquisition recently, and yet people keep criticizing Christianity on that account. Gary Samuelson