I was inspired by the darling knitted/felted sheep bag. What do y'all do for handicrafts (in your copious spare time)? I'm a neophyte knitter and crocheter, but I'm a decent quilter and piecer. I'd _like_ to scrapbook my family's photos--but I seem to be a flop at that, and I'm not nearly as into that as I am the sewing.

You made that out of sheer awesome, didn't you?!

This is So Neat! It's something I've been thinking about for a while, so it's neat to see you bring this up here. :lurk5:

I really enjoyed it! I loved the premise, I liked the resolution. Sad, but thoughtful.

A couple of Terry's oranges (one milk choc, one dark choc) a mostly empty bag of Reisens. (I love them!) Mama needs her chocolate!

Colorado Springs is large, and the US Air Force Academy is there. It's politically quite conservative and many Christian ministries are based there: Focus on the Family, Summit, Navigators. I believe CCC was based there until the late 1990s. YWAM has a training center there. Compassion international is there. Honestly, it was too large for me. It's friendly to homeschooling. Hard if you're a non-Christian. T.

I don't disagree at all that men and women are different. I don't even disagree with your metaphor--and goodness know I used it often enough when I was discipling and teaching women about this scripture. This is where we part ways. You extrapolate it out to, "woman, stay in your place" from that. . . NO. Only in the spiritual realm can genitalia be the sole determiner deciding whether one is "better served" in their choices of pursuits, skills, talents, and service. "Don't presume to do [this thing] you have every ability to do, woman. You're a square peg, you don't fit the round hole." And, I certainly have heard, from very decent people who use that verse to claim that women are emotionally more fragile than men, and intellectually less strong than men. From women! And it has only been with in the last 50 years or so that your view of this passage has become more popular. Once I supported your view. And I know it well. Now I don't.

One of my children has alopecia areata. Columbia university has recently found that it's a genetic disorder. It comes and goes on its own, though dermatologists have been giving shots and steroids to people for years. We had just turned down a dermatologist's suggestions we dose my kiddo with prednizone for it(!) when Columbia made their finding. Child's hair came back on its own. It may all fall out again, though. Who knows. http://cumc.columbia.edu/news/genetic-basis-alopecia-areata-established-first-time-columbia-research-team As far as pregnancy induced alopecia, I believe that may be a different animal altogether, but I don't know. Maybe that's hormonal and can be treated effectively with steroids. My pediatrician was the one who suggested against the steroids and said that one never knew. There's no proof that steroids helps the hair come back, but it's a correlation/causation issue, 'cause the hair could come in regardless, and might not come back even with steroids. In kiddo's case, it did. Just food for thought!

"Eaaasy there." *Pets your twitch fondly*

Yes, I can see that. I have a friend who has this under her profile picture on her FB. "'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.' So what are you waiting for? Believe!" Really? Can one just "believe"! Believe that Abraham Lincoln was a space alien! (Did it work?) :) :tongue_smilie:

Howdy, I'll be happy to share once it's either printed or posted. It's with an editor right now and he's passing it through his print or online folks to see where they want it. Fingers crossed! T.

I think. . . maybe part of it is that the "heart" hasn't changed in the way you think it has. People try to claim that religion is fact, and that if you study history and the Bible an honest seeker will believe. Really, you said it best by intimating that changing religion is in the heart. I think in many cases, deconversion is the triumph of the head over the heart. My deconversion was a matter of the "head". I've just finished a large article on apostates, and most shared this struggle. From pastors to missionaries, to young Bible college students, to Sunday School teachers. It was the struggle of cognative dissonance that was the major player, but compounded by "heart" struggles. (Here I'm referring to Evangelicals). Those who deconvert struggle hugely, and often find deconversion a psychologically taxing process. We come from a belief system that holds a terrifying, eternally torturous place that we may go to if we turn away. We believed that it was better to have a mill stone around our necks than turn anyone away from God. We were told in the Bible that non-believers and apostates were fools and would have eternal wrath poured out on them. One of the men I talked to who deconverted re-read through his favorite apologetics books and still couldn't continue in belief. He prayed, honestly, that God would make him blind if he were real. It went something like this, "Please God. You know I love you and your Son. I'm so afraid of my disbelief. Please, if I'm going the wrong way, I want to know. Please make me blind so I can see. I'd rather be blind for the rest of my life and know You, than be able to see without you." I probably don't need to tell you how that turned out. I don't tell you that story for anyone to call "bad theology" on. What I do want to show is that particularly devout people who leave struggle a lot with it. They feel they're reaching out to reality, but the fear and the magical thinking of their religion sometimes entraps them, and it's difficult to escape. "Lord, let me never, never, outlive my love for Thee." This is not to say they don't become happy again and can't leave meaningful, joyful lives. Most do. But these are also people who once believed they'd be going to hell for making the decision they made. You've got to be pretty convinced that you were wrong to jump off that ship.

Well, I can speak for myself. I have it in my signature because I want to identify myself to other ex-Christians, and it's something significant in my life. There are many people here who wear their religion or non-religion on their sigs on in their forum names. Why weren't you spending lots of time wondering why someone would put their religion on their signature? :) I'm not against Christianity any more than I'm against any other religion. I just happen to be an "ex" Christian and not an "ex" anything else. And, since I spent 20 years of my life as a serious believer and now am not anymore, I guess you could say it's pretty important to me now trying to rehash out my life and identity. It's a big, difficult change. But meaningful. I figure religious people, who have their beliefs in their sig lines/names find their beliefs very important to them. Fair enough? :) ETA: Rosie's right, at least in my case. I'd be happy to share, but not in public. (I'm writing up my deconversion "story" right now.) Sharing one's testimony in Jesus Christ is pretty well respected. Sharing one's disbelief. . . less so. Anyone is welcome to PM me. I've PMed other folks myself in the past on these issues ;)

:iagree: :thumbup: OOoh, and I just saw your ETA. Thanks for the validation. I really don't like to be the nasty in the discussions. . . .I just do like to try to give a different perspective. And I'm finding that mine is pretty unusual. I won't forget that little guy's comment either, even if I have forgotten his name :(

Three thumbs-up!

Actually, it was possibly my favorite church I ever went to, I bet lots of Evangelicals on this board would really like it. :) There was a lot of balance in my church. Woman worship leader, upbeat music, lots of really fun homeschoolers. Plenty of others with mothers who worked outside the home. It didn't divert theologically from most Evangelical church I've ever run across. Plus, it was one fellow in one class. I didn't mind it at the time, but my husband rolled his eyes at being asked "permission." I got to speak my mind, I was given a platform, I got to say what I was interested in saying, and answered questions. You're right, that not all Christians or churches are crazy, but there are aspects of these issues is many churches. It's because issues like sex-roles are all over the Bible. Also, there are power issues in any organization. And when you have a guidebook that already emphasizes men/women, it's a good springboard. And issues of authority (power) don't necessarily have to be between men/women. I saw something that fascinated me (not in a good way) a while back with a female friend of mine and the worship minister (woman) at her church. She was suggesting a change in . . .something, I can't remember what, but the worship minister got mad at her for "ursurping her authority." Apparently, the worship minister was supposed to have authority over her because she didn't hold a role. :lol: So, no. No one is saying all Christians are like this, or all churches. And I give people the benefit of the doubt that they are bright enough to understand that. (Christians are everywhere, and likely everyone on this board knows a handful they can compare :)) I am saying that authority and gender roles/responsibilities are a Common Issue, whether in small or large ways, though more commonly among "Bible believing" groups. (Hence the Bible verses previously referenced). Even in churches where women can have "every" role. . . except that as a senior pastor. It may be open, affirming, ministering to the poor, faithful to the gospel, seeker-friendly, etc. but there's still the man/woman authority issue.

I can see how it would be really depressing. I feel bad for women who feel terribly hindered and abused by such a belief system. I'm really fortunate that I have a husband who was less committed to the hierarchy than I was. :) He had no trouble being "under the authority" of a woman either. And I don't know that _most_ men, even those who believe in Christian headship would treat a woman badly to her face, but they would feel the woman would receive greater blessing by maintaining her own sphere and that it keeps her from spiritual harm. That's one way of spinning it. I find it fascinating at how many women are first drawn to Christian Patriarchy and headship, even encouraging their husbands toward it. (As was our case) There's an entire church branch in Australia (based on a well-known, fundamentalist group here in the US) that's devoted to full-quiver and the Christian Patriarchy (forgive me, that's not the correct term for it, but it's not leaping to mind) that is exclusively women! I have my own pet theories about why this is the case. . . but I'll keep them to myself. For the folks for whom this works, I'm happy for them. It comes at tremendous cost for others. And that IS depressing!

Nevermind, I see someone else already gave the Biblical reference I was sharing.

Your arrangement with your husband makes perfect sense! Our marriage was like that as well, we had the idea of the head/help-meet, but we were equal in decision making. Nothing has really changed for us now, other than the fact that we don't hold a spiritually mandated identity and functioning for the sexes. Oh, I feel for your in your position, that's hard. But congratulations on your graduation! What's your degree? M.Div? Indeed, your "simple" question is a very, very challenging one, and one that's been an issue since--well, if you take the Bible literally--the fall of creation :)

I'm so sorry. That's just horrible. :grouphug: (I've never actually used a hug smiley before. But this called for it.)

Yeah, I guess that would depend on the seminary and the denomination. Some seminaries don't take women in pastoral training programs because of their theology, some will. It's one of those issues. I'm sorry my post was depressing. :( I find it all very interesting looking back, and, honestly, I found it interesting while I was a part of it. I liked being "in submission" to my husband--of course, he's a great guy and he never "wielded it." Also, since I was a conservative literalist, I often felt like if I were sacrificing things, for being a woman--or whatever reason, because of my beliefs, in some respects I felt great about it. Funny, even now, I can still understand, on a gut-level why women can really enjoy the "help meet" role and the "submission" response. The more you submit, the godlier you are. :) I wouldn't have put it that way, but honestly, deep down, that was part of it. And it was part of my personality, so that worked perfectly. Helped that I'm not super leader material. If I were a visionary and a leader type, it would have made me bananas. How about you? What about this topic interests you, and what about submission and women submitting to the authority of men interests you, apart from Scripture? (I ask because I think people tease things out of Scripture because something about that specific issues interest them.) I'm generalizing though, so . . .yanno, take that for what it's worth. :001_smile:

Well, shoot. I didn't want to have to be the one to answer this, but no one else has bitten. Ok, this is certainly NOT comprehensive, but they are some of my experiences with this issue. The answer to all of this, "it depends." When Annie Graham Lotz began teaching the Bible (or whatever term you wish to call it--people bickered about what she was actually doing) to mixed-gender groups, different men took it differently. Some listened (some said it was because it wasn't in a worship setting, some "just because"), some men left before she began speaking, some stood and turned their backs to her as she spoke. Now, this was in a religious teaching context. As for secular occasions. Some friends of mine who were of a very conservative bent believed (as did their entire church) that women were to have no authority over men. So, when I was talking about my job prospects after grad. school--I meant to teach--, I was told that such a thing was unbiblical. Even in their church schools, women didn't teach boys after the ago of about 10 or so, not even secular subjects They understood that this wasn't the way of the world though, and so if the father ever had to learn something from a woman, he accepted it, but considered it a sign that Satan was influencing the world away from the pure milk of the Word. He was polite about it, however, and I don't believe he ever mentioned it to the woman teaching him (of course, I don't KNOW this). Also, I didn't ask him whether he'd rather learn something from a dumb guy who wasn't educated in a matter or an educated, intelligent woman who knew how to teach a given subject. Ability didn't matter. Private parts did. Back to religious issues. Once, I was asked to talk in my church Sunday School class about why I wore a head covering. This is a subject based strongly upon the "headship principle" of I Cor 11, something that this subject (women in positions of authority over men) pertains to, of course. Since I was the only women of that church who wore a headcovering, and people were interested, I was asked to speak. However, since it was a mixed-gender class, my husband was asked whether he permitted me to speak (to make sure I had the blessing of his authority) and the teacher (a man) made it a point to say to the class that he was sharing his authority with me on that subject for that class, period. Also, he said that I wasn't really teaching--I was "sharing" and that what I said wasn't authoritative. Hey, presto! Authority issue done away with. :D So, those are just some of my experiences with how Christian men may take women in "authority" over them, in secular, as well as religious situations. Something just popped to mind, possibly my "favorite" male/female religious story that happened to me, personally. It comes from teaching swimming lessons in high school. I was helping a little boy (7 or so) learn the back float. He wasn't sure I was going to hold him up as he floated. "I promise you, I won't let you sink." "You might. You're probably not strong enough to hold me up." "Oh, I bet I can hold you up. I'm pretty strong." "You're not as strong as me, though. The Bible says you're a weaker vessel." *sigh* teach 'em young. I really haven't found it any funnier as time has gone by. Maybe some people will find it amusing though.

Hmmm, also food for thought. I don't know anything about Trader Joes. I've never even heard of it.

Wow, sounds great! Thanks, ladies.

Yes. Generally, I'm fine with being done. Really, each pregnancy and each c-section got worse. I still love babies, and love holding babies, and smelling their heads, and their tiny turtle-beak mouths and the fine, transparent fingernails. But, there was just no way we could do any more, and it was ok. I've never wept over my tubal ligation or wanted to have it reversed. Mostly I just wish I could be a better mother to the ones I have, and know that I would be a worse mother to more :) We definitely felt done, but it doesn't mean we were cheering or didn't mourn the passing of this stage of our lives.